Thomas Fischer wrote:
That said, the best bet would be to manually define the column
type to be an UNSIGNED INTEGER in the DB and then use BIGINT
as the type in the schema. This will make the Record object
use the long type and avoid having large binary int values
become negative.
That sound like a good solution. The only small problem is that I
generate the schema.xml directly from the database,
so next time i change the database and need a new schema.xml file, I
will have to change the schema.xml file again.
IMHO torque:jdbc is no good as a totally automatic way to create a
schema.xml. It is good as a first guess, but nothing more, because the
informations from the jdbc driver are not complete enough to extract a
good schema.
If it worked for you so far, you were lucky.
Or maybe Torque have lots of features I don't know about.
But what kind of features in my database could be a problem for torque:jdbc?
I love torque, because I can just define my database in sql and then run
maven torque:jdbc to get a schema.xml file, that maps
all the tables to classes, with primary and foreign keys, and allow me
to retrieve data from the database.
Martin
Oh and to be total off-topic: Does anyone have a description/status for
"torque 4.0" I am thinking about things such as
"New features","Status"(Is anyone really working on it at all) and
"expected release date").
Hm, yes, "we are thinking about it" is a good description of the status.
The problem is that everybody was very busy with other stuff the last half
of a year. But now with the economy crisis coming, probably there will be
more time in the near future.
Thomas
