ideally, it should be a setting that you can choose per table instead

On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 3:45 PM, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote:

> That would actually be a serious breaking change, because now NH would
> generate tables without clustered indexes, meaning that you cannot use the
> NH schema in real projects anymore.I have no problem with adding a feature
> that would allow this, but I would say that this need to be optional.
> I am in favor of doing this with a derived dialect, btw, that uses an
> already established extensibility path and is quite straight forward.
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Davy Brion <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> there are pro's and con's to using a clustered or non clustered index for
>> a primary key.... the one that will perform better basically depends on your
>> specific scenario
>>
>> however, there is a limit in SQL server which only allows one clustered
>> index per table... if you need a clustered index on anything other than the
>> primary key, you've gotta deal with a lot of pain to make that change.
>> That's why i think having the default set to non clustered is better than
>> defaulting to the only clustered index you're allowed to use per table.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> How it is an improvement?I _want_ my PK to be clustered. I make query
>>> assumptions based on that.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Davy Brion <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>
>>>> but what if the change is an _improvement_ ?
>>>>
>>>> if you feel it should've been discussed on the list first, then fine,
>>>> you're right
>>>>
>>>> by the same token, reverting the change would've warranted discussion as
>>>> well
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Dario Quintana <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It's a breaking change becuase by default NH is generating a different
>>>>> code that the users were use to it, and change the behavior of the system.
>>>>> The change could be small, but still being a breaking change.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Davy Brion <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> how exactly is that a breaking change?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Dario Quintana
>>>>> http://darioquintana.com.ar
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to