I work with Naga and have been following this thread. It sounds like the SQL generation of foreign key constraints in schema xml files is wonky.
Specifically: when the foreign-key's attribute foreignTable refers to a table alias, it's not finding the real table name and substituting it into the "ALTER TABLE" sql. Do I have a correct understanding of the problem? +jeff -----Original Message----- From: Blake Day [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 9:16 AM To: Turbine Users List Subject: RE: ant init error messages Actually, I was manually building the databases at first until I tried changing the name of the table. That worked, but it certainly was annoying. I was running ant init, but pausing right after the SQL was generated so I could go make the changes to the file. I then unpaused ant init for the SQL insertion to take place. Michael Blake Day Artistry Studios - e-commerce design, implementation and hosting email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -----Original Message----- From: Colm McCartan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 4:53 AM To: Turbine Users List Subject: Re: ant init error messages At 09:46 09/05/2002 +1000, you wrote: ><disclaimer>I haven't read this thread thoroughly.</disclaimer> > >The extend-user-howto was put together using MySQL which ignores the >referential integrity constraints that are referred to in the original post. >It is indeed possible that the documented solution will require modification >for an RDBMS that supports RI. > >Have others using PostgreSQL or Oracle successfully extended TurbineUser in >the manner described in the HOWTO? > >Scott Yes, we managed this with postgres. I posted earlier in the thread saying that this alias name is invalid with postgres because of RI - we got around this by referring the foreign key directly to TURBINE_USER. I thought Blake's solution of using the table's java-name attr to point to the appropriate class sounded like a good idea - we ended up generating the code and accepting the eerrors and then manually building the database. Re: the primary key violations that Oracle is reporting: are these tables being correctly dropped/depopulated during the build process? colm -- 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]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
