Hi epoch, > Thanks for your reply, I checked again the ticket I saw is from google > cache so it must be out of date.
We recently moved all our tickets to datamapper.lighthouseapp.com, so it's possible that ticket was moved along with it, just that the URL has changed. Do you know what URL it was in the cache? > Just wondering though, how would you tackle this problem in the > meantime? Sacrifice database purity or application level polymorphism > or somewhere in between? I'm of the belief that the database design is going to be around alot longer than application, so I tend to like to model based on the domain and then fit the tools and code around that, and keeping as much purity in the database design as I can. I tend to favor a nice simple design, using the features my storage engine provides (foreign keys, unique indexes, column types and constraints). I usually steer clear of anything resembling polymorphic associations, I find those tend to make it difficult or impossible to use foreign keys and unique constraints, while at the same time (usually) tying you down to one particular tool's approach. I would prefer the more "classical" approach that requires explicit join tables in those cases. Dan (dkubb) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DataMapper" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/datamapper?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
