Re: My local Cayenne changes

From: Craig Miskell (cmiskel..lbatross.co.nz)
Date: Mon Jan 06 2003 - 16:18:38 EST

  • Next message: Craig Miskell: "Re: Algorithm notes... where?"

    My NZD$0.02.... I think it's well worth having. That said, I can't say
    I have any personal need, nor the time to do it, but it's certainly
    worth supporting if possible. The trick will be supporting it in such a
    way that it doesn't slow down or interfere with current methods (hmmmmm
    maybe the current methods are slower than this would be? :-))

    Craig

    On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 10:05, Dave Slusher wrote:
    > I just can't help but adding my 0.01 EUR here again ... What's the use of
    > that feature (apart from feature-completeness)?
    >
    > >This will only complicate things on the adaptor layer of cayenne. If it
    > >were to save round-trips to the database I'd be happy but this isn't the
    > >case here. So what's the use?
    > >
    > >Maybe I'm too puristic here? :-)
    >
    > For my own needs, it is because Cayenne may not be the only interface into
    > the DB, so you can't assume that all PK are generated by it. The assumption
    > y'all make pretty commonly is that Cayenne is the only insertor into the
    > DB, which is not the case in my project. If it isn't and there are tables
    > with autoincrement keys, then the DB needs to generate those natively and
    > have Cayenne access them.
    >
    > This is a philosophical question that I can't answer. Which is better for
    > Cayenne as a whole?
    > 1) Requiring that if Cayenne inserts into a DB with autoincrement tables,
    > no non-Cayenne systems insert (which is how it is now)
    > 2) Complicating the adaptors and doing the bookkeeping of whether keys are
    > generated internally or externally.
    >
    >
    > d
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Mon Jan 06 2003 - 16:15:41 EST