Hello.
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 12:34, sasha wrote:
> I'm still not convinced. Sure you can ensure the field is de-facto PK,
> but as it's more walking on thin ice than robust design I think you,
> as developer, should modify your model accordingly and keep it.
How to modify Model for View witho
> This isn't question of MS SQL vs. Firebird. For same views, both behave same.
MS add views into model by default.
--
Start uncovering the many advantages of virtual appliances
and start using them to simplify applica
On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 01:38, sasha wrote:
> The biggest problem is views. You said that you don't include views into
> model because lack of information about keys.
Not *me*. It's Entity Framework that needs keys and designer that
doesn't include views (in case it cannot infer some key).
> I'v
> I'm still not convinced. Sure you can ensure the field is de-facto PK,
> but as it's more walking on thin ice than robust design I think you,
> as developer, should modify your model accordingly and keep it.
The biggest problem is views. You said that you don't include views into
model because
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 12:34, sasha wrote:
>>> 1) any column of table or view field (including not primary keys) with
>>> #PK_GEN# is a key field with autoincrement
>>
>> Though it's possible, why would you wanna mark field as PK if it's not
>> in database? This may (and will, you bet) strange er
>> 1) any column of table or view field (including not primary keys) with
>> #PK_GEN# is a key field with autoincrement
>
> Though it's possible, why would you wanna mark field as PK if it's not
> in database? This may (and will, you bet) strange errors.
For views, for very small tables without pr
Though it's interesting, I'm personally against these "too much"
custom hacks. First the de-facto standard in SqlClient doesn't support
any of these, even the MS SQL has option to define i.e. attributes.
Second, it creates another metadata that's merged with real structure.
And last if the informat
> It depends on what you define by hard.
Hard - it's when using of existing model generation mechanism is not
possible.
Not hard - it's when it is possible to make small changes in the code to
tell model generator that:
1) any column of table or view field (including not primary keys) with
#P
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 16:11, sasha wrote:
> Is it hard to implement handling of descriptions like #KEY# and
> #REFERENCES#(, ... , )# for view columns?
It depends on what you define by hard.
--
Jiri {x2} Cincura (CTO x2develop.com)
http://blog.cincura.net/ | http://www.ID3renamer.com
---
Hi Jiri.
Is it hard to implement handling of descriptions like #KEY# and
#REFERENCES#(, ... , )# for view columns?
--
Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find b
10 matches
Mail list logo
