Sure... I can understand that.
But if you're generating against a db that supports db-generated keys,
and you have an entity that requests db-generated keys, then it seems
like there's no reason to include the row for that entity in the
auto_pk_support table, other than the fact that having it there
doesn't do any harm (except confuse new users :), but keeps the
codebase for the schema generation a little cleaner. It smells like
an oversight, but I'm not sure that it is, so I was curious. :)
Robert
On Apr 20, 2010, at 4/204:09 PM , Michael Gentry wrote:
> "I'm actually curious to know the rationale behind that one, myself."
>
> In the beginning ... OK, I'm speculating here because I wasn't around
> in the beginning ... I believe Cayenne ONLY supported the
> AUTO_PK_SUPPORT, although maybe Oracle sequences were there early on.
> Over time, DB-generated key support was added (sometime in 2.x, I
> think) and also PostgreSQL sequences. It is also the only method that
> is going to work on all DBs.
>
> mrg
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Robert Zeigler
> <robert.zeigle..oxanemy.com> wrote:
>> I can understand Joe's confusion: not only does cayenne generate the
>> AUTO_PK_SUPPORT table, but it also inserts a row for each table,
>> regardless
>> of whether that table is using cayenne vs. db-generated ids.
>> I'm actually curious to know the rationale behind that one,
>> myself. :) I
>> mean, I know cayenne will fall back to using cayenne-generated ids
>> if the db
>> connected to (or corresponding driver) doesn't support auto-pk
>> generation.
>> But you should be able to detect that at schema generation time,
>> and you
>> have the mapping in hand to determine which entities will use db-
>> generated
>> pks... so... at the very least, shouldn't you only insert a row for
>> those
>> entities which need it?
>>
>> The flip side, though, is that having an unused row in the db will
>> have
>> virtually no performance impact, and it keeps the generation code
>> much
>> simpler. *shrug* Just thinking out loud, I guess... I'd love to
>> hear the
>> original rationale for including all entities in the table,
>> regardless of
>> what their pk-generation strategy is. :)
>>
>> Robert
>>
>> On Apr 20, 2010, at 4/203:43 PM , Michael Gentry wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Joe,
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Joe Baldwin <jfbaldwi..arthlink.net
>>> >
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Michael,
>>>>
>>>>> However, I would suggest not doing both strategies on the same
>>>>> table as
>>>>> it will probably bite you in the long run somehow.
>>>>
>>>> That is not my intention (but I agree with you). I am verifying
>>>> all of
>>>> my entities right now. However, the Cayenne Modeler
>>>> configuration was not
>>>> clear. You said that if I set the "PK Generation Strategy" to
>>>> "Database
>>>> Generated" but then I unintentionally had the "Create Primary Key
>>>> Support"
>>>> checked in the "Generate DB Schema" Options dialog, then it would
>>>> create the
>>>> AUTO_PK_SUPPORT table.
>>>>
>>>> It is not clear to me why you have this in two separate config
>>>> parameters. Base on your explanation (in the previous email),
>>>> that if you
>>>> select the "PK Generation Strategy" type for the individual
>>>> entities, then
>>>> the "Create Primary Key Support" option should be automatically
>>>> configured
>>>> at that time.
>>>>
>>>> Said a different way: why would the Cayenne Modeler create
>>>> Cayenne-Managed Primary Key Support for tables with the "PK
>>>> Generation
>>>> Strategy" to "Database Generated"?
>>>
>>>
>>> I think you are confusing Cayenne Modeler's schema generation
>>> feature
>>> with Cayenne's runtime primary key support feature. More below.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I may be wrong, but base on what you had described, it seems like
>>>> Cayenne
>>>> Modeler is creating a conflicting configuration in this scenario.
>>>
>>>
>>> There is no conflict. Perhaps if you don't use "Database Generated"
>>> on any DbEntities then it would be safe in Cayenne Modeler to not
>>> have
>>> the checkbox when generating the SQL to create the AUTO_PK_SUPPORT
>>> table, but I'm not even sure I agree with that idea. Keep in mind
>>> that each table can have different PK generation options (even
>>> though
>>> it would potentially be confusing). Cayenne doesn't stop you from
>>> using the AUTO_PK_SUPPORT on some entities even when you are using
>>> MySQL's auto-generated PK on other entities (for example, you may
>>> need
>>> higher performance on some tables for bulk inserts). Cayenne will
>>> use
>>> whichever strategy you specify for the entity, but allows you to
>>> create the AUTO_PK_SUPPORT if it is needed (your call) when you
>>> generate the SQL.
>>>
>>>
>>>>> If you have Cayenne generating the keys, it'll push them to MySQL.
>>>>
>>>> I agree, but I have clearly set "PK Generation Strategy" to
>>>> "Database
>>>> Generated". So my question remains: given that the CM allows
>>>> conflicting
>>>> parameters, which one takes precedence here? I have set "PK
>>>> Generation
>>>> Strategy" to "Database Generated", are you saying that Cayenne
>>>> then ignores
>>>> this configuration?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> However, I would suggest not doing both strategies on the same
>>>>> table as
>>>>> it will probably bite you in the long run somehow.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I agree. That is *definitely* not my intention, (But as I
>>>> described
>>>> above, it appears that this is very easy to do with
>>>> CayenneModeler.)
>>>>
>>>> Michael, what you have described concerning CM is not intuitive.
>>>> I could
>>>> easily see a designer configuring one table with Cayenne-Managed
>>>> auto-generation, and another with database-auto-generation
>>>> (because Cayenne
>>>> Modeler allows it). If what you are saying is true, then
>>>> selecting the
>>>> "Create Primary Key Support" checkbox, will override they
>>>> "database-auto-generation" parameter.
>>>
>>>
>>> That's actually not at all what I am saying. Selecting the "Create
>>> Primary Key Support" checkbox in Cayenne Modeler's schema generation
>>> tool just creates it in the schema. It doesn't override what you
>>> set
>>> for each individual entity. Whomever is doing the design needs to
>>> decide how the PKs are generated on each table. In a lot of
>>> applications it is the same method for all entities, but it doesn't
>>> have to be that way.
>>>
>>>
>>>> If this is as bad as you suggest, then Cayenne Modeler should
>>>> either
>>>> prevent this from happening or display an explicit warning.
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't think it is bad at all and never suggested it was. It is a
>>> very important and useful feature.
>>>
>>> mrg
>>
>>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Wed Apr 21 2010 - 00:29:44 EDT