Rails doesn't insist - it's only Marnen.
On Sep 17, 7:42 pm, Howard Yeh <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sep 17, 2:13 pm, Marnen Laibow-Koser <rails-mailing-l...@andreas-
>
>
>
> s.net> wrote:
> > Howard Yeh wrote:
>
> > [...]
>
> > > The particular case is for a has_many association, but I want to avoid
> > > the overhead of having two indices.
>
> > That strikes me as a foolish premature optimization, rather like saying
> > that you don't want headlights on your car because they take too much
> > power from the engine. :)
>
> > > It'll be insertion only, so duplicate foreign key is acceptable.
>
> > Well, of course duplicate foreign keys would be acceptable. But what do
> > you mean by "insertion only"? Do you mean you'll never be reading from
> > the table? If so, why have it?
>
> > > The association has the bag semantics.
>
> > I'm not familiar with that term. What do you mean?
>
> It just means under a key there can be many items. That's exactly what
> I want, and it seems silly to have a primary key I don't use. But
> nevermind that, if rails insists, so be it.
>
>
>
> > > If this doesn't work, what's "create_table :id => false" ever used
> > > for?
>
> > For tables without AR models. In a typical Rails app, that would only
> > be habtm join tables.
>
> > AR wants a primary key, and in any case, it's poor practice not to have
> > one, even if it's composite.
>
> > Best,
> > --
> > Marnen Laibow-Koserhttp://www.marnen.org
> > [email protected]
>
> > --
> > Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby
on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
