That doesn't make sense how an add/remove doesn't fire on the object... even if the data is all wonky, the add/remove should still work. the proxy() method on the ObjectProxy always goes *somewhere* even if that somewhere goes to an error.
Mark On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 11:21 AM, whostheJBoss <[email protected]>wrote: > > addTags() works the first time, when I dump getTagsArray() after the > first save, they show up. > > Any add or remove after that is not reflected in the object. > > On Nov 2, 4:09 pm, Mark Mandel <[email protected]> wrote: > > So what happens between: > > > > Before second save: > > true - getIsDirty() > > true - getTagsIsLoaded() > > > > --> dump out the tags - are all the tags there? or did addTags() not > work? > > > > After second save (save fails): > > false - getIsDirty() > > false - getTagsIsLoaded() > > > > What is weird is the getTagsIsLoaded() is being reset back to 'false', > after > > the save. > > > > Mark > > > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 11:00 AM, whostheJBoss < > [email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oops, I had a slight omission in the original post (or one of those > > > following it, not sure at what point I came across this aspect of the > > > behavior), the first addTags() after calling the array works, > > > subsequent calls won't. > > > > > Sorry, so I meant when running the event that does the save a second > > > time. > > > > > Order: > > > 1.) Call an event that uses getTagsArray(); > > > 2.) Call an event that uses addTags(tag); to add a tag, the save works > > > and tag shows up > > > 3.) Call an event again that uses addTags(tag); to add a tag, the save > > > does not work, tag does not show up > > > > > So, the first time I call the addTags() method after having called > > > getTagsArray(), anything after that won't. > > > > > On Nov 2, 3:44 pm, Mark Mandel <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > What is the second save? I only see one save in the original code? > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 10:38 AM, whostheJBoss < > > > [email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > Before calling getTagsArray(): > > > > > false - getIsDirty() > > > > > false - getTagsIsLoaded() > > > > > > > After calling getTagsArray(): > > > > > true - getIsDirty() > > > > > true - getTagsIsLoaded() > > > > > > > Immediately after first save (save works): > > > > > false - getIsDirty() > > > > > true - getTagsIsLoaded() > > > > > > > Before second save: > > > > > true - getIsDirty() > > > > > true - getTagsIsLoaded() > > > > > > > After second save (save fails): > > > > > false - getIsDirty() > > > > > false - getTagsIsLoaded() > > > > > > > On Nov 2, 2:27 pm, Mark Mandel <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 9:25 AM, whostheJBoss < > > > [email protected] > > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > Performance is horrid with that many objects. I have since > switched > > > to > > > > > > > using a query for the large collections (which also fixes the > > > original > > > > > > > issue of this post). I had a 2900% increase in performance. I > > > hadn't > > > > > > > noticed the performance problems originally, since the objects > were > > > > > > > still in memory after creation, so they were loading instantly > on > > > the > > > > > > > view page. After reinitializing my application and then trying > to > > > load > > > > > > > the objects, the problem is apparent. I was only testing with 5 > or > > > 10 > > > > > > > in the beginning so the problem floated by unnoticed, so I'm > glad I > > > > > > > switch to a query anyway. Still, the original many-to-many add > / > > > get > > > > > > > array problem persists in the cases where I only have a few > > > objects. I > > > > > > > have been using a query for those as well, but would still like > it > > > to > > > > > > > work through Transfer if possible, as I would like to use some > of > > > the > > > > > > > objects. > > > > > > > > Generally speaking setting up relationships so that they have a > huge > > > > > number > > > > > > of objects is a bad idea... > > > > > > > > > To answer your question, yes, this is only happening when the > > > objects > > > > > > > are proxied. I will check the results of getIsDirty() and > > > > > > > getTagsIsLoaded(), but I should let you know that I have tried > > > > > > > running .loadTags(); before calling getTagsArray(), but the > issue > > > is > > > > > > > unaffected. What results should I have for those two? > > > > > > > > Dirty should be 'true', and isLoaded() should also be true. > > > > > > > > > Oh, a sort of side-note, but having run these queries via TQL > to > > > patch > > > > > > > the problem, I notice that they are run each time and are not > > > cached. > > > > > > > I have taken to copying the generated SQL from Transfer out > into a > > > > > > > normal <cfquery> so that I can enable caching when I need to. > Is > > > there > > > > > > > a way to turn on caching for TQL queries? > > > > > > > > There isn't a way to cache TQL results as of yet. > > > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > E: [email protected] > > > > > > T:http://www.twitter.com/neurotic > > > > > > W:www.compoundtheory.com > > > > > > -- > > > > E: [email protected] > > > > T:http://www.twitter.com/neurotic > > > > W:www.compoundtheory.com > > > > -- > > E: [email protected] > > T:http://www.twitter.com/neurotic > > W:www.compoundtheory.com > > > -- E: [email protected] T: http://www.twitter.com/neurotic W: www.compoundtheory.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Before posting questions to the group please read: http://groups.google.com/group/transfer-dev/web/how-to-ask-support-questions-on-transfer You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transfer-dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/transfer-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
