We're in a position where we have an application that will have about 100 databases for individual client sites running on the same cluster. Since these clients have individual databases, they'd require unique charts.
So if we've got a change to be made to an existing chart, we either need to fix it on one, clone it 100 times, update the data source on the 99 new ones, and update our client application with the new chart ID, OR make that change on the existing 100 charts manually.
Being able to have something like a master chart that you could pass a data source to and it fill in the data from it, or possibly even passing the parameters that generate the chart itself as a json file or something (data source, fields, colors, table column width, etc...) and having that returned would be most beneficial to our organization.
I'd like to second this idea.
We're in a position where we have an application that will have about 100 databases for individual client sites running on the same cluster. Since these clients have individual databases, they'd require unique charts.
So if we've got a change to be made to an existing chart, we either need to fix it on one, clone it 100 times, update the data source on the 99 new ones, and update our client application with the new chart ID, OR make that change on the existing 100 charts manually.
Being able to have something like a master chart that you could pass a data source to and it fill in the data from it, or possibly even passing the parameters that generate the chart itself as a json file or something (data source, fields, colors, table column width, etc...) and having that returned would be most beneficial to our organization.