Committed -> Revision 3954, closing NH1661, NH 1274. schema-action="none|drop|export|update|validate|all"
Tests are passing etc. The only part that I'm not certain about is Joined subclasses and other tricky mapping situations. I haven't ever used those so I didn't know how to test them correctly. If someone who uses those and would like to not export them could take a look that would be great. Otherwise, it works great for the Views that I was mapping. -Will On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 1:57 PM, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm sorry... my fault. > "validate" is the right value for the new attribute. > > 2008/12/15 Will Shaver <[email protected]> >> >> Because the tool and the method are called 'validate' instead of >> 'verify' I am going to go with 'validate' as the xml keyword. >> >> >> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Tuna Toksöz <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Verify is a newly added tool. SchemaValidator is the name, in Tools >> > namespace. >> > And yes ValidateSchema is what is used in that. >> > >> > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 11:04 PM, Will Shaver <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> Ok, am doing the work to switch this over now based on your feedback. >> >> >> >> Update, export and drop are easy to implement and I think I have those >> >> done and working. I'm writing test cases to make sure. >> >> >> >> What do you mean by 'verify'? Do you mean Configuration.cs Like 1985 >> >> -> ValidateSchema? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 4:26 AM, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> > Related to this issue we have probably something else... >> >> > Do someone can check if catalog+schema is well supported in each >> >> > schema-action ? >> >> > Thanks. >> >> > >> >> > 2008/12/13 Stephen Bohlen <[email protected]> >> >> >> >> >> >> I am inclined to agree with this suggestionl; I had the same thought >> >> >> when >> >> >> reading this thread: what about the rest of the other schema-related >> >> >> ops? >> >> >> It would be great if we had a more extensible approach to this (as >> >> >> you >> >> >> are >> >> >> proposing here) that would also allow for easily adding support for >> >> >> any >> >> >> MORE >> >> >> schema-related ops that might be introduced in the future too. >> >> >> >> >> >> BTW, I think it would be great to get something like this into NH -- >> >> >> the >> >> >> awkwardness of handling mapped view during schema-gen has been a >> >> >> nuisance I >> >> >> have battled with on several projects (and we have dealt with it by >> >> >> using >> >> >> custom sql in the create/drop sections of the mappings but this >> >> >> always >> >> >> felt >> >> >> like a hack). This approach (Will's combined with Fabio's >> >> >> suggestion) >> >> >> seems >> >> >> much more elegant. >> >> >> >> >> >> -Steve B. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 6:26 AM, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> I Will. >> >> >>> We have various tools involving the schema: >> >> >>> - Export >> >> >>> - Drop >> >> >>> - Update >> >> >>> - Verify >> >> >>> What about something like the follow: >> >> >>> <classe name="Something" schema-action="export, drop, update, >> >> >>> verify"> >> >> >>> The schema-action attribute can work like the "cascade" attribute >> >> >>> as a >> >> >>> multiple choice. >> >> >>> All possible values of schema-action will be: none, all, export, >> >> >>> drop, >> >> >>> update, verify >> >> >>> Default value is : all >> >> >>> Thought ? >> >> >>> >> >> >>> 2008/12/12 Will Shaver <[email protected]> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> A while back I asked about means to exclude a table from the >> >> >>>> schema >> >> >>>> export. As this wasn't possible, I've now added it to my version >> >> >>>> of >> >> >>>> the >> >> >>>> trunk. Before I commit I wanted to run it by people. Currently I >> >> >>>> have >> >> >>>> it set >> >> >>>> up as follows: >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Tables are included by default. (As before.) >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Tables mapped as: >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> < >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> class name="Products" exportable="false"> >> >> >>>> ... >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Will not be published in either the 'Drop Table' or the 'Create >> >> >>>> Table' >> >> >>>> commands from the schema export tool. This solves Jira issue 1274. >> >> >>>> I >> >> >>>> have >> >> >>>> this working including the modification to the >> >> >>>> xsd/Hbm.generated.cs >> >> >>>> files. >> >> >>>> Is this an acceptable means of excluding certain classes from >> >> >>>> export? >> >> >>>> For >> >> >>>> reference, the reason for doing this could include mapping Views, >> >> >>>> tables >> >> >>>> from a different project, tables with existing data to be >> >> >>>> preserved >> >> >>>> etc. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Your .02c would be useful. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> -Will >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> -- >> >> >>> Fabio Maulo >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > Fabio Maulo >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Tuna Toksöz >> > http://tunatoksoz.com >> > >> > Typos included to enhance the readers attention! >> > >> > > > > > -- > Fabio Maulo >
