>> I found a bug a couple weeks back where I had a DB structure that had >> this odd table hanging around where the only field was the primary >> key, which was also a foreign key. I found at the time that you could >> create a new() on that object, which would save() fine. But if you >> ever wanted to call save() a second time, it would fail because the >> SQL generated is something like: >> >> UPDATE foo SET WHERE id = ?; >> >> This obviously fails. > > What database are you using?
Sorry, Postgres. >> Anyway, I'm now seeing the same problem again when you use save >> (changes_only => 1), but there were no changes. It generates the same >> SQL as above because it always seems to think the primary key is a >> modified field. >> >> my $foo = My::Foo->new(id => 1); >> $foo->load; >> $foo->save(changes_only => 1); >> >> Because we created foo by setting id to 1, it thinks "id" is a >> modified field. > > Is the id field auto-incremented, or just an int? I have tried both, it doesn't seem to matter. And I don't see why it should. I'm not modifying the "id" field at all. regards, Danial ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Rose-db-object mailing list Rose-db-object@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rose-db-object
