Hi Chuck,
On 15 Aug 2017, at 16:44, Chuck Hill wrote:
> For cases like this, the database is the right, and only, place to guarantee
> this.
Thanks. For what it’s worth, I agree. I think I just hesitated thinking it
might be painful to set up the stored procedure and trigger using migrations,
Hi Paul,
For cases like this, the database is the right, and only, place to guarantee
this.
Chuck
From: Webobjects-dev
on behalf of Paul
Hoadley
Date: Monday, August 14, 2017 at 7:11 PM
To: WebObjectsDev
Subject: Enforcing a maximum cardinality on a many-to-many relationship
Hello,
I
Hello,
I have EOs Job and Worker. Job.workers is a many-to-many relationship to
Worker, set up in the usual way, so there’s a JobWorker join table.
Job.maxWorkers is a mandatory Integer attribute whose value will be 1 or
greater.
I need to enforce a business rule such that Job.workers.count
On 29 Jan 2015, at 2:52 pm, Paul Hoadley wrote:
>> So, here’s my recommendation:
>>
>> 1) Make your “Connection” entity have a single integer primary key. Do not
>> have a compound PK.
>
> Is a compound PK going to prevent ERXExistsQualifier working in a case like
> this? I can make the chan
Hi Aaron,
On 29 Jan 2015, at 2:04 pm, Aaron Rosenzweig wrote:
> When you turn on the SQL adaptor debugging it will become clear what it is
> doing wrong. Then you’ll go “duh!"
The generated SQL is:
SELECT t0.id, t0.id_no, t0.user_id FROM teacher t0 INNER JOIN connection T1 ON
t0.id = T1.teac
4 PM, Paul Hoadley wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have two entities in a model: Teacher and School. There is a many-to-many
> relationship between Teacher and School, represented as Connection, a join
> entity. So, Teacher and School both have a 'connections' relationship, and
Hello,
I have two entities in a model: Teacher and School. There is a many-to-many
relationship between Teacher and School, represented as Connection, a join
entity. So, Teacher and School both have a 'connections' relationship, and
Connection has both 'teacher' and &#x
On Mar 14, 2012, at 11:47 PM, Ramsey Gurley wrote:
>
> On Mar 13, 2012, at 10:08 PM, David Avendasora wrote:
>
>>
>> On Mar 13, 2012, at 8:13 AM, Chuck Hill wrote:
>>
>>> It looks like the problem is the join table. Where does that sit? I
>>> suspect that Propogate Primary Key is not going
On Mar 13, 2012, at 10:08 PM, David Avendasora wrote:
>
> On Mar 13, 2012, at 8:13 AM, Chuck Hill wrote:
>
>> It looks like the problem is the join table. Where does that sit? I
>> suspect that Propogate Primary Key is not going to work across databases.
>> You might have to manage that man
On 2012-03-13, at 10:08 PM, David Avendasora wrote:
>
> On Mar 13, 2012, at 8:13 AM, Chuck Hill wrote:
>
>> It looks like the problem is the join table. Where does that sit? I
>> suspect that Propogate Primary Key is not going to work across databases.
>> You might have to manage that manua
Hello Dave, Chuck, Alex
I guess we would settle to mix them tables in 1 user.
Thanks for the help everybody! I appreciate it.
Troy
On 3/14/2012 1:08 PM, David Avendasora wrote:
On Mar 13, 2012, at 8:13 AM, Chuck Hill wrote:
It looks like the problem is the join table. Where does that sit?
On Mar 13, 2012, at 8:13 AM, Chuck Hill wrote:
> It looks like the problem is the join table. Where does that sit? I suspect
> that Propogate Primary Key is not going to work across databases. You might
> have to manage that manually.
>
> Chuck
Is this where I put my rant about the evils of
Wonder and I enjoy it a lot. I'm having
>> a simple insert problem.
>>
>>
>> Welcome!
>>
>> My DB is Oracle and I have 2 Models(different User) .
>> My EOModel would look like this:
>> Model1
>> URL: jdbc:oracle:thin:@db.test:152
t;>
>>> I'm new to Webobjects and Wonder and I enjoy it a lot. I'm having a simple
>>> insert problem.
>>
>> Welcome!
>>
>>> My DB is Oracle and I have 2 Models(different User) .
>>> My EOModel would look like this:
>>> M
jdbc:oracle:thin:@db.test:1521:oracletest
user:OracleConnect
Model2
URL: jdbc:oracle:thin:@db.test:1521:oracletest
user:Oracle
Now I have a Many-To-Many
Model1
URL: jdbc:oracle:thin:@db.test:1521:oracletest
user:OracleConnect
Model2
URL: jdbc:oracle:thin:@db.test:1521:oracletest
user:Oracle
Now I have a Many-To-Many Relationship Teacher(Model1)
&
racle:thin:@db.test:1521:oracletest
> user:OracleConnect
> Model2
> URL: jdbc:oracle:thin:@db.test:1521:oracletest
> user:Oracle
>
> Now I have a Many-To-Many Relationship Teacher(Model1) <-> Student(Model2).
> My Code would look like this:
>
> public void sav
n:@db.test:1521:oracletest user:OracleConnectModel2 URL: jdbc:oracle:thin:@db.test:1521:oracletest user:OracleNow I have a Many-To-Many Relationship Teacher(Model1) <-> Student(Model2).My Code would look like this: public void save() { EOEditingContext ec = (ERXEC) ERXEC.n
ct
*Model2*
URL: jdbc:oracle:thin:@db.test:1521:oracletest
user:Oracle
Now I have a Many-To-Many Relationship *Teacher(Model1) <->
Student(Model2)*.
My Code would look like this:
*public void save() {
EOEditingContext ec = (ERXEC) ERXEC.newEditingContext();
Teach
On Dec 29, 2010, at 10:21 AM, Jeff Schmitz wrote:
> Hello,
>I'm not sure how the following can happen, but I seem to have figured out
> a way to make it so. My code creates a new EO (user) and then adds an
> existing EO (this) to a "many to many" relation
llowing can happen, but I seem to have figured out
> a way to make it so. My code creates a new EO (user) and then adds an
> existing EO (this) to a "many to many" relationship of the new EO as shown
> with added logged messages:
>
> User user =
Hello,
I'm not sure how the following can happen, but I seem to have figured out a
way to make it so. My code creates a new EO (user) and then adds an existing
EO (this) to a "many to many" relationship of the new EO as shown with added
logged messages:
On Nov 10, 2009, at 3:03 PM, Kieran Kelleher wrote:
I think I know the answer, but I don't like the answer, so I am
going to ask it anyway, in case there is some way for me to get a
different answer than the one I don't like! ;-)
OK, I have a huge many-to-many relationship w
I think I know the answer, but I don't like the answer, so I am going
to ask it anyway, in case there is some way for me to get a different
answer than the one I don't like! ;-)
OK, I have a huge many-to-many relationship with a Join
ERXGenericRecord with the usual flatten rel
:05 AM, Brook, James wrote:
I am working on a Direct to Web edit page where I want to be able to
assign objects to a many-to-many relationship and also check/uncheck
a boolean attribute (meaningful class property) on the join table.
This attribute exists in addition to the two foreign keys. I gu
I am working on a Direct to Web edit page where I want to be able to assign
objects to a many-to-many relationship and also check/uncheck a boolean
attribute (meaningful class property) on the join table. This attribute exists
in addition to the two foreign keys. I guess I will need to
On Aug 11, 2009, at 10:15 AM, Ricardo J. Parada wrote:
On Aug 11, 2009, at 12:59 PM, Ray Kiddy wrote:
It is not documented, AFAIK, but I believe that "ordine" would be
found before "getOrdine".
According to :
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/MacOSXServer/Reference/WO54_Reference
On Aug 11, 2009, at 12:59 PM, Ray Kiddy wrote:
It is not documented, AFAIK, but I believe that "ordine" would be
found before "getOrdine".
According to :
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/MacOSXServer/Reference/WO54_Reference/com/webobjects/foundation/NSKeyValueCoding.DefaultImpleme
On Aug 11, 2009, at 7:04 AM, Francesco Romano wrote:
Btw.. I know the conventions in NSKeyValueCoding (I use cocoa..),
but what I asked is if there can be conflicts between getOrdine and
ordine...
That's the part I'm worried about. If you use a key path like
order.number it may get co
On Aug 10, 2009, at 6:25 AM, Francesco Romano wrote:
Ok.. I'm choosing the second method: I'll create setter and getter...
But.. two things: what is the difference between the
addToOrderRelationship method and addObjectToBothSideOfRelationship ?
The addToOrderRelationship is probably genera
:p
Btw.. how can I trash the cart automatically? Is it possible
with WO?
Francesco
On 03/ago/09, at 18:16, Francesco Romano wrote:
On 03/ago/09, at 18:04, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 04/08/2009, at 1:39 AM, Francesco Romano wrote:
On 03/ago/09, at 16:10, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 03/08/2009, at
I see... mmm... I would add a foreign key...
Every time I have tried to model this kind of relationship without a
foreign key it ends up being problematic. I don't recall the details
much though.
On Aug 7, 2009, at 11:00 AM, Francesco Romano wrote:
But it's the primary key of Cart...
But it's the primary key of Cart...
Francesco
On 07/ago/09, at 16:29, Ricardo J. Parada wrote:
On Aug 7, 2009, at 4:09 AM, Francesco Romano wrote:
The relationship order is optional but the attribute id does not
allow nulls.
I think you need to make the foreign key 'id' in cart option
On Aug 7, 2009, at 4:09 AM, Francesco Romano wrote:
The relationship order is optional but the attribute id does not
allow nulls.
I think you need to make the foreign key 'id' in cart optional so that
it can take a null when the order relationship is null.
___
n Deck wrote:
On 04/08/2009, at 1:39 AM, Francesco Romano wrote:
On 03/ago/09, at 16:10, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 03/08/2009, at 7:21 PM, Francesco Romano wrote:
Hi..
I'm having some problem with a many-to-many relationship.
I've two entities: Order and Product.
They have a many
:
On 03/ago/09, at 18:04, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 04/08/2009, at 1:39 AM, Francesco Romano wrote:
On 03/ago/09, at 16:10, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 03/08/2009, at 7:21 PM, Francesco Romano wrote:
Hi..
I'm having some problem with a many-to-many relationship.
I've two entities: Order
/ago/09, at 16:10, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 03/08/2009, at 7:21 PM, Francesco Romano wrote:
Hi..
I'm having some problem with a many-to-many relationship.
I've two entities: Order and Product.
They have a many-to-many relationship, and an attribute:
quantity.
The strange thing is that I
e:
On 03/ago/09, at 16:10, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 03/08/2009, at 7:21 PM, Francesco Romano wrote:
Hi..
I'm having some problem with a many-to-many relationship.
I've two entities: Order and Product.
They have a many-to-many relationship, and an attribute:
quantity.
The strange thing
ically? Is it possible with WO?
Francesco
On 03/ago/09, at 18:16, Francesco Romano wrote:
On 03/ago/09, at 18:04, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 04/08/2009, at 1:39 AM, Francesco Romano wrote:
On 03/ago/09, at 16:10, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 03/08/2009, at 7:21 PM, Francesco Romano wrote:
Hi..
04/08/2009, at 1:39 AM, Francesco Romano wrote:
On 03/ago/09, at 16:10, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 03/08/2009, at 7:21 PM, Francesco Romano wrote:
Hi..
I'm having some problem with a many-to-many relationship.
I've two entities: Order and Product.
They have a many-to-many relationship,
ancesco Romano wrote:
On 03/ago/09, at 18:04, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 04/08/2009, at 1:39 AM, Francesco Romano wrote:
On 03/ago/09, at 16:10, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 03/08/2009, at 7:21 PM, Francesco Romano wrote:
Hi..
I'm having some problem with a many-to-many relationship.
I&#
On 03/08/2009, at 7:21 PM, Francesco Romano wrote:
Hi..
I'm having some problem with a many-to-many relationship.
I've two entities: Order and Product.
They have a many-to-many relationship, and an attribute:
quantity.
The strange thing is that I don't see the OrderProduct mod
--> product) instead of a many-to-many
relationship.
Fez
On Aug 3, 2009, at 11:16 AM, Francesco Romano wrote:
On 03/ago/09, at 18:04, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 04/08/2009, at 1:39 AM, Francesco Romano wrote:
On 03/ago/09, at 16:10, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 03/08/2009, at 7:21 PM, Francesco Roma
, at 18:04, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 04/08/2009, at 1:39 AM, Francesco Romano wrote:
On 03/ago/09, at 16:10, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 03/08/2009, at 7:21 PM, Francesco Romano wrote:
Hi..
I'm having some problem with a many-to-many relationship.
I've two entities: Order and Product.
On 03/ago/09, at 18:04, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 04/08/2009, at 1:39 AM, Francesco Romano wrote:
On 03/ago/09, at 16:10, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 03/08/2009, at 7:21 PM, Francesco Romano wrote:
Hi..
I'm having some problem with a many-to-many relationship.
I've two entities: Order a
On 04/08/2009, at 1:39 AM, Francesco Romano wrote:
On 03/ago/09, at 16:10, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 03/08/2009, at 7:21 PM, Francesco Romano wrote:
Hi..
I'm having some problem with a many-to-many relationship.
I've two entities: Order and Product.
They have a many-to-many relatio
On 03/ago/09, at 16:10, Lachlan Deck wrote:
On 03/08/2009, at 7:21 PM, Francesco Romano wrote:
Hi..
I'm having some problem with a many-to-many relationship.
I've two entities: Order and Product.
They have a many-to-many relationship, and an attribute: quantity.
The strange thing
On 03/08/2009, at 7:21 PM, Francesco Romano wrote:
Hi..
I'm having some problem with a many-to-many relationship.
I've two entities: Order and Product.
They have a many-to-many relationship, and an attribute: quantity.
The strange thing is that I don't see the OrderProduct mo
Hi..
I'm having some problem with a many-to-many relationship.
I've two entities: Order and Product.
They have a many-to-many relationship, and an attribute: quantity.
The strange thing is that I don't see the OrderProduct model
generated...
Well.. to be honest I don't un
>> if I have the wg , I want to get all the TRANSLATIONSET that this
>>> partigual wg has. Whne I was definiyng the EOModel, I set up a manytomany
>>> relationship with a join table called WGxTS and I unchecked the Flattern
>>> box, I read it somewhere.
>>>
&
doing is being a join table for a many-to-
many relationship, then flattening it I believe is the right thing
to do.
I see.
so if I do.
NSArray aux = wg.toTranslationSets();
If you don't do flattening, then you'd need something along the
lines of: wg.toTranslationSets().va
t; >> TRANSLATIONSET.
>>
>> if I have the wg , I want to get all the TRANSLATIONSET that this
>> partigual wg has. Whne I was definiyng the EOModel, I set up a manytomany
>> relationship with a join table called WGxTS and I unchecked the Flattern
>> box, I read it s
. Whne I was definiyng the EOModel, I set up a
manytomany relationship with a join table called WGxTS and I
unchecked the Flattern box, I read it somewhere.
If all the WGxTS table is doing is being a join table for a many-to-
many relationship, then flattening it I believe is the right thing to
Hello.
I have the following:
I have a Entity called WG, and one called, TRANSLATIONSET. so the
relationship is WG << >> TRANSLATIONSET.
if I have the wg , I want to get all the TRANSLATIONSET that this partigual
wg has. Whne I was definiyng the EOModel, I set up a manytomany relationship
with a
On Jan 21, 2009, at 3:07 PM, Jean Pierre Malrieu wrote:
Le 21 janv. 09 à 20:42, Chuck Hill a écrit :
The obligation of building a schema-based qualifier is a bug I
guess, and I am a bit disappointed it has not been fixed in 8
years...
It certainly looks like a bug to me. Have you repo
Le 21 janv. 09 à 20:42, Chuck Hill a écrit :
The obligation of building a schema-based qualifier is a bug I
guess, and I am a bit disappointed it has not been fixed in 8
years...
It certainly looks like a bug to me. Have you reported this to Apple?
No, and I won't before I have a chanc
The problem described in my previous post only happens when you build
a fetch spech on a relation, and then attempt to prefetch another,
flattened, many-to-many relationship.
I found the solution in a rather old post by P. Robinson:
http://wodeveloper.com/omniLists/eof/2000/September
sco Romano wrote:
Hi...
I read in the list that if I need an attribute in a many-to-many
relationship I cannot create a "flattern" relationship.
So I created a simple n-to-1 1-to-n.
That sounds right
Now.. I don't understand if I need to do some more "work" in
ass.
On 10/dic/08, at 17:43, Francesco Romano wrote:
Hi...
I read in the list that if I need an attribute in a many-to-many
relationship I cannot create a "flattern" relationship.
So I created a simple n-to-1 1-to-n.
That sounds right
Now.. I don't understand if I nee
g the qualifier... Is there a
way to show that number?
On 10/dic/08, at 17:43, Francesco Romano wrote:
Hi...
I read in the list that if I need an attribute in a many-to-many
relationship I cannot create a "flattern" relationship.
So I created a simple n-to-1 1-to-n.
Now.. I don&
Hi...
I read in the list that if I need an attribute in a many-to-many
relationship I cannot create a "flattern" relationship.
So I created a simple n-to-1 1-to-n.
Now.. I don't understand if I need to do some more "work" in my
classes...
And... another thin
building a compound qualifier for a many-to-many relationship, against flattened relationships, EO doesn't seem to generate the appropriate SQL.Structure: Record <<-->> Group (where as these are flattened relationships with a intermediary RecordGroup join table)Qualifier: Records belo
When building a compound qualifier for a many-to-many relationship, against flattened relationships, EO doesn't seem to generate the appropriate SQL.Structure: Record <<-->> Group (where as these are flattened relationships with a intermediary RecordGroup join table)Qualifier: Rec
Hello John,
This isn't a problem, but you can't use the flattened many-to-many
relationship. Delete that from your model. Create the AccountStore
object manually, and associate it with the Account and Store objects
with 2 addObjectToBothSidesOfRelationshipWithKey statements.
I have a many-to-many relationship like this:
Account -> AccountStore -> Store
When I add a store to an account with
addObjectToBothSidesOfRelationshipWithKey (via the magic of many-to-many
relationships) the object representing the intermediate table does not get
created in memory. I
Hi there,
On 03/12/2005, at 12:40 AM, Christian Telepski wrote:
i am stuck on a many-to-many relationship.
I have 'product' <->> 'prodcat' <<-> 'category', so this means
flattened: 'product' <<->> 'category'
Is this a bug in WO?I use these types of relationships all the time so I'm sure this is not a WO bug.Given the relatively confusing nature of many-to-many relationships in WO, I created a small prototype project. I use it to maintain consistency when building many-to-many relationships. The proje
Dear all,i am stuck on a many-to-many relationship.I have 'product' <->> 'prodcat' <<-> 'category', so this means flattened: 'product' <<->> 'category'now always if i try to insert categories ina product i get following exception:A valid global ID could not be obtained for entity named prodcat, rel
68 matches
Mail list logo
