Ok,in super bad taste to reply to my own posts but I would like to add that 
I checked out the dm-is-tree and that works perfectly for my needs i.e. to 
model father child/sibling relationships, I'm still having issues with the 
god_father relation i.e. a 1:1 self referential thing.

thanks

On Wednesday, June 19, 2013 1:19:24 PM UTC-4, Charles Monteiro wrote:
>
> I'm having a bit of difficulty "getting" how to model a model's 
> relationships to more of its own kind. So :
>
>
>    1. Person (child) has 1 , father
>    2. A Father who is a Person has many children
>    3. A person has many siblings
>    4. A person has one Godfather , and a Godfather only has one god child
>
> So if I were NOT to think ORM/ DataMapper , I would assume the following:
>
> *1:n , n:1*
>
>
>
>    1. a person would have a father reference i.e. father id , so to 
>    determine one's father one would query Person table where id =  my father 
> id
>    2. To know one's children one would query person table where father_id 
>    = my id 
>    3. So for father/child , child/father, I see no need to create a 
>    secondary table i.e. should be able to rely just on Person table with the 
>    inclusion of the father_id column
>    4. No idea how to represent that in DM
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> *n:n*
>
>
>
>    1. A person has 1 or  more siblings
>    2. I would need A Siblings table where my id would be associated to 
>    another id i.e. my sibling, if I had 4 siblings there would be 4 records 
> etc
>    3. This looks like the Friendship example on the DM doc page
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> *1:1 *
>
>
>
>    1. A person only has one Godfather , and a person only has one god 
>    child
>    2. Here I could keep in the Person table reference to my godfather and 
>    reference to my godchild by maintaining a god_father_id, and god_child_id
>    3. So like the above case i.e. *1:n , n:1, *no need for an additional 
>    table, querying would be as straightforward
>    4. No idea how to represent this in DM
>
>
> So I believe I have some basic misunderstanding of how this is meant to 
> work with DM so kindly help me clear my confusion. 
>
> Much appreciated,
>
> -Charles
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"DataMapper" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/datamapper.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to