I think that cascade delete is most commonly used where there is a
one-to-possibly-zero relationship (with a [zero or one or many]-to-
one on the other side). Thus, the other side has the foreign key,
and the side with the cascade delete definition is the side with
the existence that doesn't depend on the other side. So deleting
the other side first usually solves the timing issues.
Does anyone else have an opinion on this? Should we consider the
children to be deleted before parent when cascading a delete? I have
no problem with that strategy.
Register now for BEA World 2006 --- See http://www.bea.com/
beaworld<<
Thanks for the personal invitation.
Yeah, I just noticed that they've added that to the outgoing
signature. How obnoxious. Supposedly they're working on removing
the signature for us.
Register now for BEA World 2006 --- See http://www.bea.com/beaworld<<
_______________________________________________________________________
Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated
entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or
legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
and have received this message in error, please immediately return this
by email and then delete it.
