On 19/11/2008, at 10:09 AM, Mike Schrag wrote:
I'm thinking though (in this age of optimisations) that this means
you have to map the reverse relationship in order for the pk to
propogate. Either way it seems to me that it'd make more sense if
the option to propogate (or labelled 'propogated') was on the
relationship from the join rather than to the join. I'm not sure at
this stage how that would be dealt with by the database context.
Thoughts?
You mean try to change the way the propagates primary key flag is
defined and interpreted inside of EOF? I'm not going near that with
a ten foot pole.
:-)
Doesn't everyone have inverse relationships on join entities?
They're required for flattening, and sort of annoying if you're not
flattening,
Except when you can't flatten as you're needing to store additional
info in the join.
or maybe I'm not getting what you're saying.
I'm just saying in hindsight that it might have made more sense if the
option to propogate was on the entity needing the pk as an fk (or its
relationship with source as that fk) rather than where it is.
with regards,
--
Lachlan Deck
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
