I'm sorry; I made a mistake. More experimenting based on JohnS comments and
it seems to be all working fine now - exactly as described but without
having to create a dummy column. I'm not sure what my mistake was but it is
working now. So no lazy or nonlazy parameters required and this is a good
I don't think I understand your original post either. You said:
> The relationship in the following seems to create a class
> __PACKAGE__.'::Distribution'
> which clashes with my class of the same name.
A relationship definition doesn't "create" a class. An RDBO-derived
class of the specified
> "Philip" == Philip Dye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Philip> Randal - I believe you misread my original message. No
Philip> class referenced begins with 'Rose::DB'.
Philip> Rather, it appears that '::' is appended
Philip> to the name of the current class.
Even if you use:
class_pref
Randal - I believe you misread my original message. No
class referenced begins with 'Rose::DB'.
Rather, it appears that '::' is appended
to the name of the current class.
So in class X with a child class 'X::Y', if one names a
relationship 'Y', a name clash occurs.
Frankly, I haven't delved de
On 6/27/07, Michael Lackhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I still don't understand why this is safe (I would like it to be, of course)
> Think of this scenario (all with a mod_perl app with many users): User one
> submits a form that does two loosely related write operations (no RDBO
> sub-objects)
On 6/27/07, Philip Dye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Should not Rose::DB::Object complain at some point during
> setup or perhaps on first use of the class when a listed
> primary key column is missing from the list of columns ?
I have a check for this in Metadata.pm:
foreach my $name ($self->pr
On 27 Jun 2007 at 9:45, John Siracusa wrote:
> > And if it works in principle do I have to stuff the $dbh manually into every
> > RDBO object or does it "just work" because Apache::DBI takes care that RDBO
> > gets the right (perhaps reused) handle even if RDBO always requests a fresh
> > one?
>
A typo in the name of one primary key column is silently
ignored even though no such column exists in the list of
table columns.
The impact:
When given a set of columns which are children of
another object via a one-to-many relationship, only
only one element is inserted. After being inser
On 6/27/07, Michael Lackhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It is a web app with lots of database activity (read and write). So
> performance and data integrity is an issue and my idea is to use Apache::DBI
> with autocommit => 0.
FWIW, I take the opposite approach: AutoCommit is on, and I explicitl
On 6/27/07, James Masters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Unfortunately, doing this seems to remove the onthefly column from the
> select spec completely.
You can pass a nonlazy => 1 param to change that.
> Also, I had trouble testing this properly but I think that even if lazy,
> when I do include
> "Philip" == Philip Dye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Philip> This is probably well documented somewhere but I wasn't aware of it
after
Philip> using Rose::DB for over a year so others may find this useful.
The easy solution is to have a reserved prefix for all Rose::DB subclasses and
Rose::D
David,
> > If yes, my question is, how all the RDBO internals work with such a setup.
> > If I remember correctly
> > RDBO wraps complex saves or deletes within a transaction. Would this lead
> > to something like
> > nested transactions? Is this possible at all, with sqlite (I am using now)
This is probably well documented somewhere but I wasn't aware of it
after using Rose::DB for over a year so others may find this useful.
Rose::DB::Object class name clash:
The relationship in the following seems to create a class
__PACKAGE__.'::Distribution' which clashes with my class of the
Unfortunately, doing this seems to remove the onthefly column from the
select spec completely.
Also, I had trouble testing this properly but I think that even if lazy,
when I do include the onthefly column in the select spec, it still complains
that the field doesn't exist.
> -Original Messag
Michael,
> If yes, my question is, how all the RDBO internals work with such a setup. If
> I remember correctly
> RDBO wraps complex saves or deletes within a transaction. Would this lead to
> something like
> nested transactions? Is this possible at all, with sqlite (I am using now)
> and p
Hello,
I read quite a lot recently about Apache::DBI, transactions and the problems
that might occur but I
must say that I am more confused than before as to what this all means for my
RDBO project.
It is a web app with lots of database activity (read and write). So performance
and data integ
16 matches
Mail list logo
