Example: TableOne many_to_one :table_two, key: [:col_1, :col_2, :col_3], primary_key: [:col_1, :col_2, :col_3] end
TableTwo one_to_many :table_ones, key: [:col_1, :col_2, :col_3], primary_key: [:col_1, :col_2, :col_3] end Now, presuming these line up: t1 = TableOne.first t1.table_two => nil t1.table_two_dataset.first => <instance of TableTwo> This behavior only seems to happen when one of the columns is null. And the behavior is true if I attempt the association in the other direction. Is this behavior intended or am I missing something? The only way I could replicate it was a null key. (In my real life problem, the key in both tables had a foreign key constraint on a third table that is optionally null.) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sequel-talk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sequel-talk. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
