John,
I did run it through a validator, and it does not give me any errors.
>From what I see in our schema, we do not have such compound FK's, but then
there might be some legacy stuff, that is sitting in there.. that Might be
killing us..
I am still investigating this, and will let you guys know as soon as I
find a solution..
Thanks. -Subhash.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John McNally" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Turbine Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 8:02 PM
Subject: Re: Empty Extension Objects
it is possible that torque does not cover every possibility, but have
you taken jon's advice and made sure your schema is validating? I
believe the validation is required in the latest versions of torque, but
earlier versions had it as optional.
The one problem I am aware of is with a compound fk, that also has part
of the compound fk repeated as a single fk.
<fk foreignTable="A">
<reference l="a" f="a"/>
<reference l="b" f="b"/>
</fk>
<fk foreignTable="A">
<reference l="a" f="a"/>
</fk>
Not sure what the point of such a fk definition would be, but someone
pointed out it does not work. (Maybe I am missing a detail that would
make this more meaningful.)
john mcnally
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
