Search Results

Search found 8156 results on 327 pages for 'generic relationship'.

Page 125/327 | < Previous Page | 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132  | Next Page >

  • Delphi 2010 and .net

    - by Kico Lobo
    Hi, how is Delphi 2010 relationship with .net? I remember that not long ago you could only generate .net 1.1 code. And now, how is that? How legacy Delphi code (mostly 7) behave when compiled for the .net platform instead of Win32? Is it compatible?

    Read the article

  • Convert this Linq query from query syntax to lambda expression

    - by Jinkinz
    I'm not sure I like linq query syntax...its just not my preference. But I don't know what this query would look like using lambda expressions, can someone help? from securityRoles in user.SecurityRoles from permissions in securityRoles.Permissions where permissions.SecurableEntity.Name == "Unit" && permissions.PermissionType.Name == "Read" orderby permissions.PermissionLevel.Value descending select permissions There is a many-to-many relationship between users and security roles that makes this extra confusing. Thanks! Kelly

    Read the article

  • NHibernate - I have many, but I only want one!

    - by MartinF
    Hello, I have a User which can have many Emails. This is mapped through a List collection (exposed by IEnumerable Emails on the User). For each User one of the Emails will be the Primary one ("Boolean IsPrimary" property on Email). How can I get the primary Email from User without NHibernate loads every email for the User ? I have the following two entities, with a corresponding table for each public class User { public virtual int Id { get; set; } public virtual IEnumerable<Email> Emails { get; set; } // public virtual Email PrimaryEmail { get; set; } - Possible somehow ? } public class Email { public virtual int Id { get; set; } public virtual String Address { get; set; } public virtual Boolean IsPrimary { get; set; } public virtual User User { get; set; } } Can I map a "Email PrimaryEmail" property etc. on the User to the Email which have "IsPrimary=1" set somehow ? Maybe using a Sql Formula ? a View ? a One-To-One relationship ? or another way ? It should be possible to change the primary email to be one of the other emails, so i would like to keep them all in 1 table and just change the IsPrimary property. Using a Sql Formula, is it be possible to keep the "PrimaryEmail" property on the User up-to-date, if I set the IsPrimary property on the current primary email to false, and then afterwards set the PrimaryEmail property to the email which should be the new primary email and set IsPrimary to true ? Will NHibernate track changes on the "old/current" primary Email loaded by the Sql Formula ? What about the 1 level cache and the 2 level cache when using SqlFormula ? I dont know if it could work by using a View ? Then i guess the Email could be mapped like a Component ? Will it work when updating the Email data when loaded from the View ? Is there a better way ? As I have a bi-directional relationship between User and Email I could in many cases of course query the primary Email and then use the "User" property on the Email to get the User (instead of the other way around - going from User to the primary Email) Hope someone can help ?

    Read the article

  • Using cascade in NHibernate

    - by Tyler
    I have two classes, call them Monkey and Banana, with a one-to-many bidirectional relationship. Monkey monkey = new Monkey(); Banana banana = new Banana(); monkey.Bananas.Add(banana); banana.Monkey = monkey; hibernateService.Save(banana); When I run that chunk of code, I want both monkey and banana to be persisted. However, it's only persisting both when I explicitly save the monkey and not vice versa. Initially, this made sense since only my Monkey.hbm.xml had a mapping with cascade="all". <set name="Bananas" inverse="true" cascade="all"> <key column="Id"/> <one-to-many class="Banana"/> </set> I figured I just needed to add the following to my Banana.hbm.xml file: <many-to-one name="Monkey" column="Id" cascade="all" /> Unfortunately, this resulted in a Parameter index is out of range error when I tried to run the snippet of code. I investigated this error and found this post, but I still don't see what I'm doing wrong. I have the relationship mapped once on each side as far as I can tell. For full disclosure, here are the two mapping files: Monkey.hbm.xml <class name="Monkey" table="monkies" lazy="true"> <id name="Id"> <generator class="increment" /> </id> <property name="Name" /> <set name="Bananas" inverse="true" cascade="all"> <key column="Id"/> <one-to-many class="Banana"/> </set> </class> Banana.hbm.xml <class name="Banana" table="bananas" lazy="true"> <id name="Id"> <generator class="increment" /> </id> <property name="Name" /> <many-to-one name="Monkey" column="Id" cascade="all" /> </class>

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET The underlying connection was closed: Could not establish trust relat

    - by David Lively
    When attempting to use HttpWebRequest to retrieve a page from my dev server, I get a web exception: The underlying connection was closed: Could not establish trust relationship for the SSL/TLS secure channel." The remote certificate is invalid according to the validation procedure... The url I'm attempting to read from is a plain-old http://myserver.com/mypage.asp - no SSL. The production server has a valid certificate so this shouldn't be an issue, but our dev server doesn't. Help!

    Read the article

  • IoC, AOP and more

    - by JMSA
    What is an IoC container? What is an IoC/DI framework? Why do we need a framework for IoC/DI? Is there any relationship between IoC/DI and AOP? What is Spring.net/ninject with respect to IoC and AOP?

    Read the article

  • CakePHP HABTM: Editing one item casuses HABTM row to get recreated, destroys extra data

    - by leo-the-manic
    I'm having trouble with my HABTM relationship in CakePHP. I have two models like so: Department HABTM Location. One large company has many buildings, and each building provides a limited number of services. Each building also has its own webpage, so in addition to the HABTM relationship itself, each HABTM row also has a url field where the user can visit to find additional information about the service they're interested and how it operates at the building they're interested in. I've set up the models like so: <?php class Location extends AppModel { var $name = 'Location'; var $hasAndBelongsToMany = array( 'Department' => array( 'with' => 'DepartmentsLocation', 'unique' => true ) ); } ?> <?php class Department extends AppModel { var $name = 'Department'; var $hasAndBelongsToMany = array( 'Location' => array( 'with' => 'DepartmentsLocation', 'unique' => true ) ); } ?> <?php class DepartmentsLocation extends AppModel { var $name = 'DepartmentsLocation'; var $belongsTo = array( 'Department', 'Location' ); // I'm pretty sure this method is unrelated. It's not being called when this error // occurs. Its purpose is to prevent having two HABTM rows with the same location // and department. function beforeSave() { // kill any existing rows with same associations $this->log(__FILE__ . ": killing existing HABTM rows", LOG_DEBUG); $result = $this->find('all', array("conditions" => array("location_id" => $this->data['DepartmentsLocation']['location_id'], "department_id" => $this->data['DepartmentsLocation']['department_id']))); foreach($result as $row) { $this->delete($row['DepartmentsLocation']['id']); } return true; } } ?> The controllers are completely uninteresting. The problem: If I edit the name of a Location, all of the DepartmentsLocations that were linked to that Location are re-created with empty URLs. Since the models specify that unique is true, this also causes all of the newer rows to overwrite the older rows, which essentially destroys all of the URLs. I would like to know two things: Can I stop this? If so, how? And, on a less technical and more whiney note: Why does this even happen? It seems bizarre to me that editing a field through Cake should cause so much trouble, when I can easily go through phpMyAdmin, edit the Location name there, and get exactly the result I would expect. Why does CakePHP touch the HABTM data when I'm just editing a field on a row? It's not even a foreign key!

    Read the article

  • How to set up my belongs_to and has_many reference

    - by dagda1
    Hi, I have an ExpenseType object that I have created with the following migration: class CreateExpenseTypes < ActiveRecord::Migration def self.up create_table :expense_types do |t| t.column :name, :string, :null => false t.timestamps end end I can see the table name is the pluralised expense_types. My question is, how do I reference this type in a belongs_to relationship? Is it: belongs_to :expensetype or is it belongs_to :expense_type I do not seem able to set it up correctly. Cheers

    Read the article

  • Complex Entity Framework linked-graphs issue: how to limit change set / break the graph?

    - by Hightechrider
    I have an EDMX containing Sentences, and Words, say and a Sentence contains three Words, say. Appropriate FK relationships exist between the tables. I create some words: Word word1 = new Word(); Word word2 = ... I build a Sentence: Sentence x = new Sentence (word1, word2, word3); I build another Sentence: Sentence y = new Sentence (word1, word4, word5); I try to save x to the database, but EF builds a change set that includes everything, including y, word4 and word5 that aren't ready to save to the database. When SaveChanges() happens it throws an exception: Unable to determine the principal end of the ... relationship. Multiple added entities may have the same primary key. I think it does this because Word has an EntityCollection<Sentence> on it from the FK relationship between the two tables, and thus Sentence y is inextricably linked to Sentence x through word1. So I remove the Navigation Property Sentences from Word and try again. It still tries to put the entire graph into the change set. What suggestions do the Entity Framework experts have for ways to break this connection. Essentially what I want is a one-way mapping from Sentence to Word; I don't want an EntityCollection<Sentence> on Word and I don't want the object graph to get intertwined like this. Code sample: This puts two sentences into the database because Verb1 links them and EF explores the entire graph of existing objects and added objects when you do Add/SaveChanges. Word subject1 = new Word(){ Text = "Subject1"}; Word subject2 = new Word(){ Text = "Subject2"}; Word verb1 = new Word(){ Text = "Verb11"}; Word object1 = new Word(){ Text = "Object1"}; Word object2 = new Word(){ Text = "Object2"}; Sentence s1 = new Sentence(){Subject = subject1, Verb=verb1, Object=object1}; Sentence s2 = new Sentence(){Subject=subject2, Verb=verb1, Object=object2}; context.AddToSentences(s1); context.SaveChanges(); foreach (var s in context.Sentences) { Console.WriteLine(s.Subject + " " + s.Verb + " " + s.Object); }

    Read the article

  • How to Delete all data from a table which contain self referencing foreign key

    - by Shantanu Gupta
    I have a table which has employee relationship defined within itself. i.e. EmpID Name SeniorId ----------------------- 1 A NULL 2 B 1 3 C 1 4 D 3 and so on... Where Senior ID is a foreign key whose primary key table is same with refrence column EmpId I want to clear all rows from this table without removing any constraint. How can i do this? Deletion need to be performed like this 4, 3 , 2 , 1 How can I do this

    Read the article

  • Core data, sorting one-to-many child objects

    - by Shizam
    So if I have a store of parents children and the parent has a one to many relationship to children (parent.children) and they all have first names. Now, on the initial fetch for parents I can specify a sort descriptor to get them back in order of first name but how can I request the children in order? If I do a [parent.children allObjects] it just gives them back in a jumble and I'd have to sort after the fact, every time. Thanks, Sam

    Read the article

  • Wrap output of struts2 ServletDispatcherResult ?

    - by krosenvold
    I'd like to do much the same thing as the Struts2 sitemesh servlet-filter does, i.e. wrap the output of an action with some chosen content. The "problem" with the sitemesh approach is that it AFIK it does not have any relationship to the ActionInvocation, and I would like to be able to query information from the ActionInvocation when determining which content to add. I have looked through the ServletDispatcherResult, and I'm not entirly sure what's the best way to achieve this. Any suggestions ?

    Read the article

  • Good object/DB set-up for CMS-esque app for managing content and user permissions?

    - by sah302
    Hi all, so I am writing a big CMS-esque app to allow users to manage web content through web applications, I've got a pretty good db-driven user permission system going, but am having trouble coming up with a good way to handle content groups and pages, I've got a couple options and not sure which one to take. Furthermore, I am not sure how to handle static page updates that have no 'widgets' in them. My current set-up for permissions is this: Objects: User, UserGroup, UserUserGroup, UserGroupType Standard many to many relationship User -> UserUserGroup <- UserGroup each Usergroup has a UserGroupType, which could be anything from Title, Department, to PermissionGroup. PermissionGroup manages the permissions. Right now on a per page basis I check permissions based on their PermissionsGroups. So for a page which has CMS features for a news widget, I check for permission groups of "Site Admin" and "News Admin". Now the issue I am coming to is, the site has many different departments involved. No problem I think, I can just have a EntityContentGroup so any widget app can be used for any departments. So my HR department, each of their news items would be in the EntityContentGroup with the news item ID, and content group of "HR" or "HR News". But maybe this isn't the most efficient way to go about it? I don't want to put the content group simply as a NewsItemType because some news items could apply to multiple areas, so I want to be able to assign them to as many areas as I want. Likewise, all of my widget apps have this, so that's why I decided to choose EntityContentGroup and not just NewsItemContentGroup. I was also thinking well instead of doing a contentGroup do a Page object that says which page some entity should be on. It seems almost like the same thing, but would I want to use Page for something else? I was thinking Page would be used for static pages with no widgets, a simple Rich Text Editor can edit the content of that page and I save that item to a page?? And then instead of doing a page level check for UserGroup permissions, would it be better to associate a usergroup to a contentgroup, and then just depending on what contentGroup content on the page is displayed, determine the permissions through that relationship? Is that better? I am not sure at this point. I guess I am just getting a tad overwhelmed at this is the largest app in scope and size that I have ever written. What is the best approach for this based on my current user permission set-up?

    Read the article

  • One to Many relashionships for a restaurants website?

    - by myaccount
    Each restaurant has restaurant branches, each branch must determine which days of the week it opens, each of those days must determine (several) open_hour and close_hour thru that day. I created one to many relationship using these tables: rest_names --- rest_branches --- open_days --- open_hours Am I going right this way? or there is another way to do this, maybe less complicated? And how the query will be like to get the hours of a restaurant on a specific day, say sunday?

    Read the article

  • Repeating fields in similar database tables

    - by user1738833
    I have been tasked with working on a database that I have never seen before and I'm looking at the DB structure. Some of the central and most heavily queried and joined tables look like virtual duplicates of each other. Here's a massively simplified representation of the situation, with business-sensitive information changed, listing hypothetical table names and fields: TopLevelGroup: PK_TLGroupId, DisplaysXOnBill, DisplaysYOnBill, IsInvoicedForJ, IsInvoicedForK SubGroup: PK_SubGroupId, FK_ParentTopLevelGroupId, DisplaysXOnBill, DisplaysYOnBill, IsInvoicedForJ, IsInvoicedForK SubSubGroup: PK_SubSUbGroupId, FK_ParentSubGroupId, DisplaysXOnBill, DisplaysYOnBill, IsInvoicedForJ, IsInvoicedForK I haven't listed the types of the fields as I don't think it's particularly important to the situation. In addition, it's worth saying that rather than four repeated fields as in the example above, I'm looking at 86 repeated fields. For the most part, those fields genuinely do represent "facts" about the primary table entity, so it's not automatically wrong for that reason. In addition, the "groups" represented here have a property inheritance relationship. If DisplaysXOnBill is NULL in the SubSubGroup, it takes the value of DisplaysXOnBillfrom it's parent, the SubGroup, and so-on up to the TopLevelGroup. Further, the requirements will never require that the model extends beyond three levels, so there is no need for flexibility in that area. Is there a design smell from several tables which describe very similar entities having almost identical fields? If so, what might be a better design of the example above? I'm using the phrase "design smell" to indicate a possible problem. Of course, in any given situation, a particular design might well be the best solution. I'm looking for a more general answer - wondering what might be wrong with this design and what might be the better design were that the case. Possibly related, but not primary questions: Is this database schema in a reasonably normal form (e.g. to 3NF), insofar as can be told from the information I've provided. I can't see a problem with the requirements of 2NF and 3NF, except in their inheriting the requirements of 1NF. Is 1NF satisfied though? Are repeating groups allowed in different tables? Is there a best-practice method for implementing the inheritance relationship in a database as I require? The method above feels clunky to me because any query on the SubSubGroup necessarily needs to join onto the SubGroup and the TopLevelGroup tables to collect inherited facts, which can make even trivial joins requiring facts from the SubSubGroup table rather long-winded. There are, of course, political considerations to making a relatively large change like this. For the purpose of this question, I'm happy to ignore that fact in the interests of keeping the answers ring-fenced to the technical problem.

    Read the article

  • NSNotification doubt?

    - by senthilmuthu
    hi, i am new Notification.what is the purpose of it... can we use [[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] addObserver without postNotification, If we can do it,how it is identified?what is the relationship between addObserver and postNotification?any one can explain in detail?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132  | Next Page >