Yes, that would do it. Updates would need to work similarly... > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Haberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 7:06 AM > To: 'Turbine Torque Developers List' > Subject: RE: bug report: > > > We're considering another enhancement that would delete objects only > using their primary keys (assuming their set). Someone suggested it > awhile ago, and I don't think there where any objections. > > Using only the pk's to do the delete would get around your problem. > > - Stephen > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Russell Smyth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 7:06 PM > > To: Turbine Torque Developers List (E-mail) > > Subject: bug report: > > > > I have come across a problem with torque that may be > brought up by my > > particular use: > > > > Torque is unable to delete records that contain NULL values > in fields > that > > map to java primitive types - if you get the object then try > > Peer.delete(Object) - this is due to Torque filling in the criteria > for > > delet from the object, which of course will set null primitives to a > default > > value (ie int to "0"), which will not match with the null in the > database. > > > > Many would argue (some here have) that these types of fields should > not be > > null in the database - however, I am dealing with legacy > databases and > it > > cannot be avoided. > > > > Russell Smyth > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:turbine-torque-dev- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:turbine-torque-dev- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
