On 11/4/07, Mike Kear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Wow that could end up with pretty humungous sized DAO then – if I have 40 > tables on the site, I will have somewhere close to 40 'create', 40 'read', > 40, update, and 40 delete methods, plus all the other ancillary methods like > init and setservice, etc that set it all up and make it work.
No, he meant one of each DAO type. I think Derek just misunderstood your comment. I know he has multiple DAO types - but each is a singleton. > In fact I just counted the tables in the site I'm working on at the moment > and there are currently 47 tables on that database, and the task I'm working > on now will require an additional 6 tables. I personally work with XyzGateway CFCs that contain the CRUD operations as well as the aggregate query operations. I don't bother with separate DAOs at all these days. Each gateway component will deal with a tightly related group of objects / tables so I have fewer gateway CFCs than I have tables. > A CFC with 160-170 methods doesn't sound too workable to me. It is not. > I was working on the assumption that I should have more-or-less a DAO > for each table. Not exactly 1-1 relationship because sometimes it's > easier to have multiple tables worked by one DAO, but 47 of them?? Right. So at *most* 53 (47 + 6) but probably several fewer. -- Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood
