Hmmm, everything I can find on composite keys (the docs, wiki,
transfer config file docs, forums, and the tPetmarket sample
application) seem to discuss using one to many relationships for
unique composition ids, but not really anything about the many to many
that I need.
And... I can't seem to
Ok, I've reduced the problem to something much more basic...
I've removed the duplicate many to many (I completely removed any
reference to tags on comments.comment) so I know now that there are NO
duplicate relationships and comments don't have anything to do with
tags. Now I'm having the same
I take that back, sorry. If I call:
user.getPostsArray() at anytime before doing my addTags() calls I see
that behavior.
users.user has a one to many with Posts
So, if I just call my addTags() they are saved, if I do getPostsArray
() anytime before... nope.
On Sep 26, 12:39 am, whostheJBoss
In your example they are using different tables, one is using posttags,and
one is using commenttags.
I can't guarentee what will happen if you mix n' match m2m relationships on
a single table. Transfer assumes a m2m is a table with 2 foreign keys on
it, no more, no less.
If you want to go down
Oops, just a typo from removing something. In the actual code they ARE
using the same table. It's actually called taglinks
On Sep 25, 9:02 pm, Mark Mandel mark.man...@gmail.com wrote:
In your example they are using different tables, one is using posttags,and
one is using commenttags.
I can't
