I think that is too complicated. I think it is enough with _one_ unique set of attributes/references for an entity. In cases when more is added that can be handled by hand written db constraints and jpa annotations, and sometimes SpecialCases.xpt. Keep it simple. /Patrik
PaloT wrote: > > Good proposal. I'm just unsure about unique keys. More often we need > uniqueness on separate column than as composite key. Maybe we should > add name to unique and join them with this name like: > String name key > String group unique "key" > Integer externalID unique > String some1 unique "some" > String some2 unique "some" > > Will generate 3 unique indexes. > 1) "key" above name and group attribute > 2) "externalID" above externalID > 3) "some" above some1 and some2 > > Is it too complex? > > Pavel > > On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 8:16 PM, Patrik Nordwall > <patrik.nordw...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Good! >> >> I think we can add unique as keyword in DSL. Then I would like to have >> this >> functionality: >> >> - in meta model we should also add unique (boolean) field on Attribute >> and >> Reference >> - in generation of unique annotations and in ddl we should look at above >> unique field in meta model, instead of looking at key >> - in transformation we should set above unique fields for >> attributes/references marked as key, but if unique has been defined we >> should use that instead, this means that it possible to define key and >> unique differently, and unique has highest prio >> - several attributes and references can be marked with unique, if more >> than >> one it is a composite unique constraint (similar to how we do with key >> currently) >> - unique constraint in ddl should also be generated >> >> Does that make sense? >> >> Please add ticket in jira also. Important for release notes. >> >> /Patrik >> >> >> >> >> >> PaloT wrote: >>> >>> DomainObject.xpt::columnAnnotations updated in SVN. Now you can use >>> hint="unique" on attribute to define attribute to be unique. Patrik >>> should we add this as another validation keyword or will we keep it as >>> hint? >>> >>> Pavel >>> >>> >>> On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Pavel Tavoda <pavel.tav...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> should I generate field which is unique? We have many constraint >>>> possibilities but I don't know how to make field unique. I can do it >>>> with 'key' but than attribute isn't changeable, this attribute is >>>> changeable and following doesn't work: >>>> String name key changeable >>>> >>>> TNX >>>> >>>> Pavel >>>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Fornax-developer mailing list >>> Fornax-developer@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fornax-developer >>> >>> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://old.nabble.com/Unique-field-tp28510970s17564p28512722.html >> Sent from the Fornax-Platform mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Fornax-developer mailing list >> Fornax-developer@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fornax-developer >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Fornax-developer mailing list > Fornax-developer@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fornax-developer > > -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Unique-field-tp28510970s17564p28520432.html Sent from the Fornax-Platform mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Fornax-developer mailing list Fornax-developer@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fornax-developer
