Please quote when replying. It is very difficult to follow the conversation if you don't.
Simão Freitas wrote: > I didn't know about Rspec and Machinist. I'll try them thanks for the > recommendation. > You're welcome. > I'm using composite_primary_keys, I didn't explain myself well lol. > > I don't use migrations. Well, start now! There are many advantages and virtually no disadvantages to using migrations. > > OH! You're right! There are tables missing from the schema.rb file. That would be a serious problem. The test framework uses rake db:schema:load to create the database. > Don't know the reason because when I ran the tests (and db creation > previously) separately there was no error. Anyway, there's an error in > every table that was missing, related to the BIT datatype. Something > like this: > > # Could not dump table "addresses" because of following StandardError > # Unknown type 'bit(1)' for column 'is_primary' > > So, maybe that datatype isn't supported? I think I'll just use TINYINTs > lol Use migrations and you won't have to worry, since Rails handles the abstraction. > > By the way, I don't have a very large knowledge about rails, i'm still > figuring it out, but here's another question: > > Can I use migrations with physical constraints in the database? You mean such as foreign key constraints? > Won't > they become "nulled" and inconsistent after a migration or any change in > the database? What gives you that idea? > All that will be lost right? No! Use the foreigner plugin like I suggested. > > Thanks a lot for your help! Best, -- Marnen Laibow-Koser http://www.marnen.org [email protected] -- Posted via http://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.
