Search Results

Search found 2412 results on 97 pages for 'relationship'.

Page 18/97 | < Previous Page | 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25  | Next Page >

  • Model relationships in ASP.NET MVC

    - by Fabiano
    Hi I recently started evaluating ASP.NET MVC. While it is really easy and quick to create Controllers and Views for Models with only primitive properties (like shown in the starter videos from the official page) I didn't find any good way to work with references to complex types. Let's say, I have these Models: public class Customer { public int Id { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public Address Address { get; set; } public IList<Order> Orders { get; set; } } public class Address { public int Id { get; set; } public string ..... ..... } public class Order { public int Id { get; set; } public Customer Customer { get; set; } public string OrderName { get; set; } ..... } Note that I don't have foreign keys in the models (like it's typical for LINQ to SQL, which is also used in the sample video) but an object reference. How can I handle such references in asp.net mvc? Does someone has some good tips or links to tutorials about this problem? maybe including autobinding with complex types.

    Read the article

  • Doctrine does not export relation properly

    - by iggnition
    Hi, I've got a MySQL 5.1.41 database which i'm trying to fill with doctrine, but doctrine does not insert the relations correctly. My YAML is: Locatie: connection: doctrine tableName: locatie columns: loc_id: type: integer(4) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: true autoincrement: true org_id: type: integer(4) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: false autoincrement: false naam: type: string(30) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: true autoincrement: false straat: type: string(30) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: true autoincrement: false huisnummer: type: integer(4) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: true autoincrement: false huisnummer_achtervoegsel: type: string(3) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: false autoincrement: false plaats: type: string(25) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: true autoincrement: false postcode: type: string(6) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: true autoincrement: false telefoon: type: string(12) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: true autoincrement: false opmerking: type: string() fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: false autoincrement: false inloggegevens: type: string() fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: false autoincrement: false relations: Organisatie: local: org_id foreign: org_id type: one onDelete: CASCADE onUpdate: CASCADE Organisatie: connection: doctrine tableName: organisatie columns: org_id: type: integer(4) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: true autoincrement: true naam: type: string(30) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: true autoincrement: false straat: type: string(30) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: true autoincrement: false huisnummer: type: integer(4) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: true autoincrement: false huisnummer_achtervoegsel: type: string(3) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: false autoincrement: false plaats: type: string(25) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: true autoincrement: false postcode: type: string(6) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: true autoincrement: false telefoon: type: string(12) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: true autoincrement: false opmerking: type: string(255) fixed: false unsigned: false primary: false notnull: false autoincrement: false relations: Locatie: local: org_id foreign: org_id type: many Now if a make an organisation and then create a location which has a foreignkey to organisation everything is fine. but when i try to update the org_id with phpmyadmin i get a contraint error. If i manually set the foreign key to ON_UPDATE CASCADE it does work. Why does doctrine not set this option? I got it to work in Propel, but i really want to use doctrine for this.

    Read the article

  • Add note model in Rails

    - by dannymcc
    Hi Everyone, I am following the 15 minute blog tutorial on Ruby on Rails .com: http://media.rubyonrails.org/video/rails_blog_2.mov and am stumbling into some issues. I am using the following alterations to the names in the tutorial: posts = kases comments = notes I have setup the models as follows: class Kase < ActiveRecord::Base validates_presence_of :jobno has_many :notes belongs_to :company # foreign key: company_id belongs_to :person # foreign key in join table belongs_to :surveyor, :class_name => "Company", :foreign_key => "appointedsurveyor_id" belongs_to :surveyorperson, :class_name => "Person", :foreign_key => "surveyorperson_id" def to_param jobno end and... class Note < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :kase end The Notes controller look like this: # POST /notes # POST /notes.xml def create @kase = Kase.find(params[:kase_id]) @note = @kase.notes.build(params[:note]) redirect_to @kase end and the database scheme for Kases looks like this: create_table "notes", :force => true do |t| t.integer "kase_id" t.text "body" t.datetime "created_at" t.datetime "updated_at" end and for kases... create_table "kases", :force => true do |t| t.string "jobno" t.date "dateinstructed" t.string "clientref" t.string "clientcompanyname" t.text "clientcompanyaddress" t.string "clientcompanyfax" t.string "casehandlername" t.string "casehandlertel" t.string "casehandleremail" t.text "casesubject" t.string "transport" t.string "goods" t.string "claimantname" t.string "claimantaddressline1" t.string "claimantaddressline2" t.string "claimantaddressline3" t.string "claimantaddresscity" t.string "claimantaddresspostcode" t.string "claimantcontact" t.string "claimanttel" t.string "claimantmob" t.string "claimantemail" t.string "claimanturl" t.string "lyingatlocationname" t.string "lyingatlocationaddressline1" t.string "lyingatlocationaddressline2" t.string "lyingatlocationaddressline3" t.string "lyingatlocationaddresscity" t.string "lyingatlocationaddresspostcode" t.string "lyingatlocationcontactname" t.string "lyingattel" t.string "lyingatmobile" t.string "lyingatlocationurl" t.text "comments" t.string "invoicenumber" t.string "netamount" t.string "vat" t.string "grossamount" t.date "dateclosed" t.date "datepaid" t.datetime "filecreated" t.string "avatar_file_name" t.string "avatar_content_type" t.integer "avatar_file_size" t.datetime "avatar_updated_at" t.datetime "created_at" t.datetime "updated_at" t.string "kase_status" t.string "invoice_date" t.integer "surveyorperson_id" t.integer "appointedsurveyor_id" t.integer "person_id" t.string "company_id" t.string "dischargeamount" t.string "dishchargeheader" t.text "highrisesubject" end Whenever I enter a note into the kase show view's note entry form: <h2>Notes</h2> <div id="sub-notes"> <%= render :partial => @kase.notes %> </div> <% form_for [@kase, Note.new] do |f| %> <p> <%= f.label :body, "New Note" %><br /> <%= f.text_area :body %> </p> <p><%= f.submit "Add Note" %></p> <% end %> partial: <% div_for note do %> <p> <strong>Created <%= time_ago_in_words(note.created_at) %> ago</strong><br /> <%= h(note.body) %> </p> <% end %> I get the following error: ActiveRecord::RecordNotFound in NotesController#create Couldn't find Kase with ID=Test Case I have tried removing the def to_param jobno end from the kase model, but the same error shows. Any ideas what I'm missing? Thanks, Danny

    Read the article

  • Django foreign keys cascade deleting and "related_name" parameter (bug?)

    - by Wiseman
    In this topic I found a good way to prevent cascade deleting of relating objects, when it's not neccessary. class Factures(models.Model): idFacture = models.IntegerField(primary_key=True) idLettrage = models.ForeignKey('Lettrage', db_column='idLettrage', null=True, blank=True) class Paiements(models.Model): idPaiement = models.IntegerField(primary_key=True) idLettrage = models.ForeignKey('Lettrage', db_column='idLettrage', null=True, blank=True) class Lettrage(models.Model): idLettrage = models.IntegerField(primary_key=True) def delete(self): """Dettaches factures and paiements from current lettre before deleting""" self.factures_set.clear() self.paiements_set.clear() super(Lettrage, self).delete() But this method seems to fail when we are using ForeignKey field with "related_name" parameter. As it seems to me, "clear()" method works fine and saves the instance of "deassociated" object. But then, while deleting, django uses another memorized copy of this very object and since it's still associated with object we are trying to delete - whooooosh! ...bye-bye to relatives :) Database was arcitectured before me, and in somewhat odd way, so I can't escape these "related_names" in reasonable amount of time. Anybody heard about workaround for such a trouble?

    Read the article

  • get_or_create generic relations in Django & python debugging in general

    - by rabidpebble
    I ran the code to create the generically related objects from this demo: http://www.djangoproject.com/documentation/models/generic_relations/ Everything is good intially: >>> bacon.tags.create(tag="fatty") <TaggedItem: fatty> >>> tag, newtag = bacon.tags.get_or_create(tag="fatty") >>> tag <TaggedItem: fatty> >>> newtag False But then the use case that I'm interested in for my app: >>> tag, newtag = bacon.tags.get_or_create(tag="wholesome") Traceback (most recent call last): File "<console>", line 1, in <module> File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/django/db/models/manager.py", line 123, in get_or_create return self.get_query_set().get_or_create(**kwargs) File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/django/db/models/query.py", line 343, in get_or_create raise e IntegrityError: app_taggeditem.content_type_id may not be NULL I tried a bunch of random things after looking at other code: >>> tag, newtag = bacon.tags.get_or_create(tag="wholesome", content_type=TaggedItem) ValueError: Cannot assign "<class 'generics.app.models.TaggedItem'>": "TaggedItem.content_type" must be a "ContentType" instance. or: >>> tag, newtag = bacon.tags.get_or_create(tag="wholesome", content_type=TaggedItem.content_type) InterfaceError: Error binding parameter 3 - probably unsupported type. etc. I'm sure somebody can give me the correct syntax, but the real problem here is that I have no idea what is going on. I have developed in strongly typed languages for over ten years (x86 assembly, C++ and C#) but am new to Python. I find it really difficult to follow what is going on in Python when things like this break. In the languages I mentioned previously it's fairly straightforward to figure things like this out -- check the method signature and check your parameters. Looking at the Django documentation for half an hour left me just as lost. Looking at the source for get_or_create(self, **kwargs) didn't help either since there is no method signature and the code appears very generic. A next step would be to debug the method and try to figure out what is happening, but this seems a bit extreme... I seem to be missing some fundamental operating principle here... what is it? How do I resolve issues like this on my own in the future?

    Read the article

  • Is there a declarative language for data definitions?

    - by Jekke
    Reading about WPF and thinking about my application's data store at the same time led me to wonder if there are any languages or tools that allow you to define relational data in a declarative way? A shallow Google search suggests no such thing exists. Yet it seems so obviously useful. The kind of tool I have in mind would declaratively describe (at least) entities, relationships and views is a platform-agnostic way that would act as an abstraction layer between data-driven applications and their datastores. Does any such tool exist?

    Read the article

  • Django: many-to-one fields and data integrity

    - by John
    Let's say that I have a Person who runs an inventory system. Each Person has some Cars, and each Car has a very large number of Parts (thousands, let's say). A Person, Bob, uses a Django form to create a Car. Now, Bob goes to create some Parts. It is only at the form level that Django knows that the Parts belong to some specific Car, and that the Parts.ForeignKey(Car) field should only have a specific Car as a choice. When creating a Part, you have to mess with the form's constructor or similar in order to limit the choice of Cars to only the cars owned by Bob. It does not seem proper that to enforce this ownership at the form level. It seems that other users' Cars must be inaccessible to anyone but the owner of the Car. What do you all think about this, and is there any way to enforce this?

    Read the article

  • sql foreign keys

    - by Paul Est
    I was create tables with the syntax in phpmyadmin: DROP TABLE IF EXISTS users; DROP TABLE IF EXISTS info; CREATE TABLE users ( user_id int unsigned NOT NULL auto_increment, email varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', pwd varchar(32) NOT NULL default '', isAdmin int(1) unsigned NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (user_id) ) TYPE=INNODB; CREATE TABLE info ( info_id int unsigned NOT NULL auto_increment, first_name varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', last_name varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', address varchar(300) NOT NULL default '', zipcode varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', personal_phone varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', mobilephone varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', faxe varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', email2 varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', country varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', sex varchar(1) NOT NULL default '', birth varchar(1) NOT NULL default '', email varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', PRIMARY KEY (info_id), FOREIGN KEY (email) REFERENCES users(email) ON UPDATE CASCADE ON DELETE CASCADE ) TYPE=INNODB; But shows the error "#1064 - You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near 'TYPE=INNODB' at line 11 " If i remove the TYPE=INNODB in the end of create the tables, it will show the error "#1005 - Can't create table 'curriculo.info' (errno: 150) ".

    Read the article

  • Database relationships using phpmyAdmin (composite keys)

    - by Cool Hand Luke UK
    Hi, I hope this question is not me being dense. I am using phpmyAdmin to create a database. I have the following four tables. Don't worry about that fact place and price are optional they just are. Person (Mandatory) Item (Mandatory) Place (Optional) Price (Optional) Item is the main table. It will always have person linked. * I know you do joins in mysql for the tables. If I want to link the tables together I could use composite keys (using the ids from each table), however is this the most correct way to link the tables? It also means item will have 5 ids including its own. This all cause null values (apparently a big no no, which I can understand) because if place and price are optional and are not used on one entry to the items table I will have a null value there. Please help! Thanks in advance. I hope this makes sense.

    Read the article

  • Symfony 1.4: use relations in fixtures with propel

    - by iggnition
    Hello, I just started to use the PHP symfony framework. Currently I'm trying to create fixture files in YAML to easily insert data into my MySQL database. Now my database has a couple of relations, I have the tables Organisation and Location. Organisation org_id (PK) org_name Location loc_id (PK) org_id (FK) loc_name Now I'm trying too link these tables in my fixture file, but for the life of me I cannot figure out how. Since the org_id is auto-incremented I can't simply use org_id: 1 In the location fixture. How can I fix this?

    Read the article

  • does the order a composite key is defined matter?

    I have a table with (col1,col2) as a composite primary key. create table twokeytable(col1 int,col2 int,constraint twokeytable_pk primary key (col1,col2)); and another table with col3,col4 collumns witha composite foreign key(col3,col4) which references the(col1,col2) primary key. For some processing I need to drop the foreign key and primary constraints .While restoring the constraints does order of the keys matter?. are these same? create table fktwokeytable(col3 int,col4 int,constraint fkaddfaa_fk foreign key(col4,col3) references twokeytable(col1,col2)) and create table fktwokeytable(col3 int,col4 int,constraint fkaddfaa_fk foreign key(col3,col4) references twokeytable(col1,col2))

    Read the article

  • [rails] do we need database level constraints

    - by shrimpy
    i have the same problem as in the following post http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1451570/ruby-on-rails-database-migration-not-creating-foreign-keys-in-mysql-tables so i am wondering, why rails do not support generate foreign key by default??? it is not necessary??? or we suppose to do it manually?

    Read the article

  • Type casting in TPC inheritance

    - by Mohsen Esmailpour
    I have several products like HotelProduct, FlightProduct ... which derived from BaseProduct class. The table of these products will be generated in TPC manner in database. There is OrderLine class which has a BaseProduct. My problem is when i select an OrderLine with related product i don't know how cast BaseProduct to derived product. for example i have this query: var order = (from odr in _context.Orders join orderLine in _context.OrderLines on odr.Id equals orderLine.OrderId join hotel in _context.Products.OfType<HotelProduct>() on orderLine.ProductId equals hotel.Id where odr.UserId == userId && odr.Id == orderId orderby odr.OrderDate descending select odr).SingleOrDefault(); In OrderLine i have BaseProduct properties not properties of HotelProduct. Is there any way to cast BaseProduct to derived class in OrderLine or any other solutions ?

    Read the article

  • Problems getting foreign keys working in MySQL

    - by thehuby
    I've been trying to get a delete to cascade and it just doesn't seem to work. I'm sure I am missing something obvious, can anyone help me find it? I would expect a delete on the 'articles' table to trigger a delete on the corresponding rows in the 'article_section_lt' table. CREATE TABLE articles ( id INTEGER UNSIGNED PRIMARY KEY AUTO_INCREMENT, url_stub VARCHAR(255) NOT NULL UNIQUE, h1 VARCHAR(60) NOT NULL UNIQUE, title VARCHAR(60) NOT NULL, description VARCHAR(150) NOT NULL, summary VARCHAR(150) NOT NULL DEFAULT "", html_content TEXT, date DATE NOT NULL, updated TIMESTAMP DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP ON UPDATE CURRENT_TIMESTAMP )ENGINE=INNODB; CREATE TABLE article_sections ( /* blog, news etc */ id INTEGER UNSIGNED PRIMARY KEY AUTO_INCREMENT, url_stub VARCHAR(255) NOT NULL UNIQUE, h1 VARCHAR(60) NOT NULL, title VARCHAR(60) NOT NULL, description VARCHAR(150) NOT NULL, summary VARCHAR(150) NOT NULL DEFAULT "", html_content TEXT NOT NULL DEFAULT "" )ENGINE=INNODB; CREATE TABLE article_section_lt ( fk_article_id INTEGER UNSIGNED NOT NULL REFERENCES articles(id) ON DELETE CASCADE, fk_article_section_id INTEGER UNSIGNED NOT NULL )ENGINE=INNODB;

    Read the article

  • SQL - Two foreign keys that have a dependency between them

    - by Brian
    The current structure is as follows: Table RowType: RowTypeID Table RowSubType: RowSubTypeID FK_RowTypeID Table ColumnDef: FK_RowTypeID FK_RowSubTypeID (nullable) In short, I'm mapping column definitions to rows. In some cases, those rows have subtype(s), which will have column definitions specific to them. Alternatively, I could hang those column definitions that are specific to subtypes off their own table, or I could combine the data in RowType and RowSubType into one table and work with a single ID, but I'm not sure either is a better solution (if anything, I'd lean towards the latter, as we mostly end up pulling ColumnDefs for a given RowType/RowSubType). Is the current design SQL Blasphemy? If I keep the current structuree, how do I maintain that if RowSubTypeID is specified in ColumnDef, that it must correspond to the RowType specified by RowTypeID? Should I try to enforce this with a trigger or am I missing a simple redesign that would solve the problem?

    Read the article

  • I want define tables from a part of my ER Diagram.

    - by M R Jafari
    I have a ER-Diagram (Show in http://www.4freeimagehost.com/show.php?i=f82997ca4d5d.png). In the diagram you see 2 entities and a 1:N relataion together. Project has 2 columns as ProjectID, ProjectName. Employee has 3 colums as EmployeeID, EmployeeName and ProjectID. A project has ONLY 1 project-manager and project-manager is a employee. What columns add them?

    Read the article

  • [Database] How to model this one-to-one relation?

    - by pbean
    I have several entities which respresent different types of users who need to be able to log in to a particular system. Additionally, they have different types of information associated with them. For example: a "general user", which has an e-mail address and "admin user", which has a workstation number (note that this a hypothetical case). Both entities also share common properties like first name, surname, address and telephone number. Finally, they naturally need to have a (unique) user name and a password to log in. In the application, the user just has to fill in his user name and password, and the functionality of the application changes slightly according to the type of the user. You can imagine that the username needs to be unique for this work. How should I model this effectively? I can't just create two tables, because then I can't force a unique constaint on the user name. I also can't put them all in just one table, because they have different types of specific information associated to them. I think I might need 3 seperate tables, one for "users" (with user name and password), one for the "general users" and another one for the "admin users", but how would the relations between these work? Or is there another solution? (By the way, the target DBMS is MySQL, so I don't think generalization is supported in the database system itself).

    Read the article

  • In this example, would Customer or AccountInfo properly be the entity group parent?

    - by Badhu Seral
    In this example, the Google App Engine documentation makes the Customer the entity group parent of the AccountInfo entity. Wouldn't AccountInfo encapsulate Customer rather than the other way around? Normally I would think of an AccountInfo class as including all of the information about the Customer. import javax.jdo.annotations.IdGeneratorStrategy; import javax.jdo.annotations.PersistenceCapable; import javax.jdo.annotations.Persistent; import javax.jdo.annotations.PrimaryKey; import com.google.appengine.api.datastore.Key; import com.google.appengine.api.datastore.KeyFactory; @PersistenceCapable public class AccountInfo { @PrimaryKey @Persistent(valueStrategy = IdGeneratorStrategy.IDENTITY) private Key key; public void setKey(Key key) { this.key = key; } } // ... KeyFactory.Builder keyBuilder = new KeyFactory.Builder(Customer.class.getSimpleName(), "custid985135"); keyBuilder.addChild(AccountInfo.class.getSimpleName(), "acctidX142516"); Key key = keyBuilder.getKey(); AccountInfo acct = new AccountInfo(); acct.setKey(key); pm.makePersistent(acct);

    Read the article

  • How to test if a doctrine records has any relations that are used

    - by murze
    Hi, I'm using a doctrine table that has several optional relations (of types Doctrine_Relation_Association and Doctrine_Relation_ForeignKey) with other tables. How can I test if a record from that table has connections with records from the related table. Here is an example to make my question more clear. Assume that you have a User and a user has a many to many relation with Usergroups and a User can have one Userrole How can I test if a give user is part of any Usergroups or has a role. The solution starts I believe with $relations = Doctrine_Core::getTable('User')->getRelations(); $user = Doctrine_Core::getTable('User')->findOne(1); foreach($relations as $relation) { //here should go a test if the user has a related record for this relation if ($relation instanceof Doctrine_Relation_Association) { //here the related table probably has more then one foreign key (ex. user_id and group_id) } if ($relation instanceof Doctrine_Relation_ForeignKey) { //here the related table probably has the primary key of this table (id) as a foreign key (user_id) } } //true or false echo $result I'm looking for a general solution that will work no matter how many relations there are between user and other tables. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to propose Asp.Net Mvc over other technologies to client?

    - by Arnis L.
    How to show benefits of adopting asp.net mvc to client? I mean - we as developers can understand benefits of easier implementation of automated testing, better control over rendered html etc., but what would be strongest motives for client to accept usage of asp.net mvc? Maybe there's some more nice looking examples built with asp.net mvc (excluding stackoverflow) to show? p.s. Please, do not start flame war. In this case - it doesn't matter if asp.net mvc is better than x or vica versa.

    Read the article

  • How does Hibernate detect dirty state of an entity object?

    - by ???'Lenik
    Is it using some kind of byte codes modification to the original classes? Or, maybe Hibernate get the dirty state by compare the given object with previously persisted version? I'm having a problem with hashCode() and equals() methods for complicated objects. I feel it would be very slow to compute hash code if the object has collection members, and cyclic references are also a problem. If Hibernate won't use hashCode()/equals() to check the dirty state, I guess I should not use equals()/hashCode() for the entity object (not value object), but I'm also afraid if the same operator (==) is not enough. So, the questions are: How does Hibernate know if a property of an object is changed? Do you suggest to override the hashCode()/equals() methods for complicated objects? What if they contains cyclic references? And, also, Would hashCode()/equals() with only the id field be enough?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25  | Next Page >