Google says this hasn't been mentioned on this list before, so I through
I would rectify that mistake...
A while back there was a thread on the list Documentation of
DBIx::Class schemas - see
http://lists.scsys.co.uk/pipermail/dbix-class/2007-November/005307.html
Jason Kohles mentioned he
You might want to use a distinct = 1 which results into a group by sql.
-Alex
-Original Message-
From: Matt S Trout [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 8:47 PM
To: DBIx::Class user and developer list
Subject: Re: [Dbix-class] bugs? distinct SQL
On Tue, May 06, 2008 at
I strongly suggest to declare your datetime columns as such and use
DateTime-now() to get the actual datetime and use that object for your dbic
calls!
This way you are dbms independent.
-Alex
-Original Message-
From: Charles Alderman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 02,
I know what you're saying as far as staying dbms independent, but I
don't necessarily like doing it that way either. My reasoning is that
I don't always know if my application code will be running on the same
machine as the database (or even that all application code will be
running on
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 10:40 AM, Charles Alderman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know what you're saying as far as staying dbms independent, but I don't
necessarily like doing it that way either. My reasoning is that I don't
always know if my application code will be running on the same machine as
On 9 May 2008, at 21:25, Matt S Trout wrote:
Looks like the original poster decided to hit reply in a
Schema::Loader
thread so his patch got missed.
Should we apply this?
Are we better off doc'ing in copy() itself what cascade_copy does
and then
having the relationship docs just mention
