On 24.8.2015 10:02, Kent Sølvsten wrote:
Just guessing.
Could it have something to do with an attempt to be compatible with
multiple databases?
As far as i remember, Oracle does not support autoincrement (but has
sequences instead).
Hmm, yeah, the compatibility requirement/feature probably was the reason.
(most ORM frameworks have pluggable key-generation strategies depending
on the database used).
And yes, this would've been the proper solution.
I didn't know much about any stuff like that back in the days, so now
it's stuck with the application generating IDs, which of course makes it
incompatible in multiple applications -situation.
Another thing is that the assigned values can be hard to grab on
insertion - but not sure if that is really a requirement, or simply a
coincidence in the implementation.
/Kent
At least PostgreSQL has the "INSERT ... RETURNING" clause, but obviously
that is one more issue to solve through pluggable RDBMS-specific
mixins/callbacks.
Den 24-08-2015 kl. 08:45 skrev Stanislav Muhametsin:
On 24.8.2015 9:37, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
Paul (or Stan?)
In the above class there is a propertyPK that is passed around for each
insertion and +1 and so on.
1. Does that mean that SQL Indexing will not work for
multi-instances of
Zest app?
2. Normally, one would depend on the auto-increment features in
the DB.
Why wasn't that done in this case?
Cheers
Hmm, it's been years... Without looking at the code (since I have to
be at work in 15mins), I would make an educated guess that answer to
#1 is yes, and answer for #2 is no idea. I was quite a noobie back in
the days.
