Hi Pascal On Sep 28, 4:36 pm, "Pascal Craponne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 1. This is an important point, and I don't like much the idea of giving > control to the vendor (it would give to much responsibility on the > vendor).Ideally, > the Upsert would be able to support the following variants: > - Single query insert > - Double query insert, generated columns values being loaded after the > insert statement (Ingres requirements) > - Double query insert, generated columns values being loaded before the > insert statement (Firebird) > So maybe we could find a compromise like: > - vendor declares its requirements (one in the three above, or something > more extensible) > - core executes queries, depending on the vendor's requirements. > > This needs to be refined, before implementation, and I'd like to get other > contributors' opinion.
That would work, for Firebird at least. Thanks > 2. Yes, I understand, and this could be easily done. Anyway, we must keep in > mind that this is just a workaround, until DbLinq fully manages entity sets. I understand. But I want to stress that this is a blocker for most uses of DbLinq. A simple CRUD application would require specific ordering of statements if the database has foreing keys. Cheers. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DbLinq" 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/dblinq?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
