Reactor For CF lookup tables and

[Jared Rypka-Hauer]

Am I correct in assuming that where I have tables thus: Session sessionId name description enabled sessionTypeId SessionType sessionTypeId label enabled then my XML would look like this: <objects> <object name="Session"> <hasOne name="SessionType"> <relate from="sessionTypeId" to="sessionTypeId" </hasOne> </object> </objects> <objects> <object name="Session"> <hasOne name="SessionType"> <relate from="sessionTypeId" to="sessionTypeId" </hasOne> </object> <object name="SessionType" /> </objects> Which means I can make a SessionType record but can't traverse any relationships with it. This differs from ARF's belongsTo() function, which would associate a child table with the parent, so if need be you could create a SessionType record and get the parents. I guess there's 2 things that come out of this: 1) You're probably not going to need a SessionType record unless you already have a Session record 2) If you use a SessionType object tag you can at least use a Gateway against it to get a list of the values without having to have a Session to go with it... though that refers back to item 1. I can't really think of a situation where you might want a SessionType record without having reached it via a Session record. I see 1 and 2 as being at odds with eachother... is there any recommendation? Common sense is telling me that 1 is generally the best course of action and to leave the SessionType object tag out of the XML config unless I have a really compelling reason to get lookup table data independent of the record that is based upon it's values. Thoughts? Laterz, J The point I'm making is that there's no XML for the SessionType, unless it needs to be: ------------------------------------------------ Jared C. Rypka-Hauer Continuum Media Group LLC http://www.web-relevant.com Member, Team Macromedia - ColdFusion "That which does not kill me makes me stranger." - Yonah Schmeidler