Re: Relation oddity
Re: Relation oddity
- Subject: Re: Relation oddity
- From: Anjo Krank <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 20:43:16 +0200
If you are really interested, you can provide this by overriding
public void propagateDeleteForObject(EOEnterpriseObject obj,
EOEditingContext ec)
in your EntityClassDescription class. Should be pretty
straightforward to take the difference between toXXXRelationsshipKeys
and allToXXXRelationshipKeys and delete what's in there.
On Jun 27, 2006, at 12:59 PM, Christian Pekeler wrote:
I've filed a bug about this over three years ago. Just checked the
status - is still "Open." I've given up hope on that one...
Welcome to the club. My bugs about HTML 4/XHTML stuff are outstanding
since 2000.
Cheers, Anjo
Am 27.06.2006 um 19:36 schrieb Mike Schrag:
I started writing the little test after reading Jerry's email (and
before Christian responded), but just wanted to add that I see this
same behavior in the test case ... Delete rules are NOT applied for
non-class relationships. At which point, I'm not sure they add any
value at all for a regular relationship. That's too bad. I've
always wondered this one.
ms
On Jun 27, 2006, at 12:59 PM, Christian Pekeler wrote:
I believe that a distinction needs to be made between no inverse
relationship and an inverse relationship that's not marked as a
class property. By making the to-many inverse relationship not
a class property, EOF won't use it to keep the object graph
consistent (i.e., it won't fetch those 1,000,000 objects), but I
think EOF may still use this inverse relationship in ways that
can be beneficial. So I always include inverse relationships in
my eomodels but don't mark as class properties those to-many
inverse relationships that might cause unacceptable fetching
activity. Seems to work well for me.
That's an interesting conjecture. Are you aware of any reference
documentation or experimental results to support this position?
It seems equally likely (in my current state of ignorance) to
provide beneficial results, to simply consume extra unused
resources or to have no discernible effect. If beneficial
results, I'd love to know what they are. If extra unused resource
consumption, then we'd all probably be better to avoid the
distinction as well as the inverse relationship.
IIRC, earlier versions of EOF used to acknowledge delete rules on
non-property relationships. So you could mark that "1,000,000
objects to-many" as non-property and still set it for delete-deny
or delete-cascade, which was very useful. Unfortunately, that
doesn't work anymore. So unless you need that relationship to
flatten another relationship, non-property relationships don't
seem to be useful, AFAIK.
I've filed a bug about this over three years ago. Just checked the
status - is still "Open." I've given up hope on that one...
Christian
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
40mdimension.com
This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
40logicunited.com
This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden