Ashley, > Can you elaborate? What is the plan so far, that an integer with a > maximum >= 2^31-1 would be considerent a bigint?
I've outlined some of my ideas for making auto-upgrade and auto- migrate produce even tighter schemas here: http://wiki.github.com/datamapper/dm-core/roadmap So the idea is to use the smallest data type provided by the datastore that still meets the constraints you defined for the property. > Is this assuming auto-migrations? Personally I'm a pretty staunch > manual migration user, so the main thing is easy migration > definition. Actually, I'm starting to wonder if there's generally a > need for 32-bit ints in databases any more. Unless you're storing > large volume numerical data*, it seems like more of an inconvenience > than anything. dm-migrations have stagnated a bit recently and IMHO don't offer too much above what you get from other migration systems like AR's other than a slightly different UI. I'd like to resolve this if we can, and bring the API closer inline with DM's. Not only that, the auto- migrate and "classical migrations" offered by dm-migrations don't share much code, so there are subtle differences in schemas they produce. On the roadmap is to unify the backend logic so that the same code path is used to create/update schemas. Dan (dkubb) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DataMapper" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/datamapper?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
