Search Results

Search found 2729 results on 110 pages for 'fk relationship'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 20/110 | < Previous Page | 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27  | Next Page >

  • [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

  • Hibernate not saving foreign key, but with junit it's ok

    - by Leonardo
    Hi All, I have this strange problem. In a J2ee webapp with spring, smartgwt and hibernate, it happens that I have a class A wich has a set of class B, both of them mapped to table A and table B. I wrote a simple test case for testing the service manager which is supposed to do insert, update, delete and everything work as expected especially during insert. In the end I have one record in A and records in B with foreign key to A. But when I try to call the service from the web app, the entity in B are saved without a foreign key reference. I am sure that the service is the same. One thing I noticed is that enabling hibernate logging, seems that when the service is called from the application, one more update is made: insert A insert B update A update B update B (foreign key only) update A <--- ??? update B <--- ??? Instead, when junit test case is run, the update is as follows: insert A insert B update A update B update B (foreign key only) I suppose the latest update is what is causing the erroe, maybe it is overwriting values. Considering that the app is using spring, with the well known mechanism of DAO + Manager, where can I investigate to solve this issue ? Someone told me that the session is not closed, so hibernate would do one more update before release the objects by itself. I am pretty sure that all the configuration hbm, xml, and the rest are fine...but I maybe wrong. thanks

    Read the article

  • Non-normalized association with legacy tables in Rails and ActiveRecord

    - by Thomas Holmström
    I am building a Rails application accessing a legacy system. The data model contains Customers which can have one or more Subscriptions. A Subscription always belong to one and only one Customer. Though not needed, this association is represented through a join table "subscribes", which do not have an id column: Column | Type | Modifiers -----------------+---------+----------- customer_id | integer | not null subscription_id | integer | not null I have this coded as a has_and_belongs_to_many declarations in both Customer and Subscription class Customer < Activerecord::Base has_and_belongs_to_many :subscriptions, :join_table => "subscribes", :foreign_key => "customer_id", :association_foreign_key => "subscription_id" end class Subscription < Activerecord::Base has_and_belongs_to_many :customers, :join_table => "subscribes", :foreign_key => "subscription_id", :association_foreign_key => "customer_id" end The problem I have is that there can only ever be one customer for each subscription, not many, and the join table will always contain at most one row with a certain customer_id. And thus, I don't want the association "customers" on a Subscription which returns an array of (at most one) Customer, I really do want the relation "customer" which returns the Customer associated. Is there any way to force ActiveRecord to make this a 1-to-N relation even though the join table itself seems to make it an N-to-M relation? --Thomas

    Read the article

  • How to design this simple database?

    - by Vafello
    I have 2 tables - one storing user information (id, username, password) and the second one storing information about events (id, name, description, date, username(represents the user who created the event)). I would like to implement 'favourite events' functionality. This would allow the user to store his favourite events and later display them in a list. I am not sure how to implement this in terms of design. I need a simple solution. Something like storing the IDs of favourite events in a field in the user table. I am using mysql and php. Can anyone point me to the right direction?

    Read the article

  • EntityManager does not update on flush()

    - by Sara
    Java EJB's EntityManager does not update data from a Consumer. A Consumer logs into a shop, buys some stuff and wants to look at his shopping-history. Everything is displayed but his last purchase. If he logs out and in, it shows. I have used JPA to persist buys/purchases (that are mapped to the Consumer)to DB. It seems like purchases from this session can't be detected. Code: public Buys buyItem(Consumer c, int amount) { Buys b = new Buys(); b.setConsumerId(c); b.setContent("DVD"); b.setPrice(amount); em.persist(b); em.flush(); return b; } public Collection getAllBuysFromUser(Consumer consumer) { Collection collection = consumer.getBuysCollection(); return collection; } Help!? Flush does not do the trick...

    Read the article

  • Creating a Group of Groups in Django

    - by Greg
    I'm creating my own Group model; I'm not referring to the builtin Group model. I want each hroup to be a member of another group (it's parent), but there is the one "top" group that doesn't have a parent group. The admin interface won't let me create a group without entering a parent. I get the error personnel_group.parent_id may not be NULL. My Group model looks like this: class Group(models.Model): name = models.CharField(max_length=50) parent = models.ForeignKey('self', blank=True, null=True) order = models.IntegerField() icon = models.ImageField(upload_to='groups', blank=True, null=True) description = models.TextField(blank=True, null=True) How can I accomplish this? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Java sockets: multiple client threads on same port on same machine?

    - by espcorrupt
    I am new to Socket programming in Java and was trying to understand if the below code is not a wrong thing to do. My question is: Can I have multiple clients on each thread trying to connect to a server instance in the same program and expect the server to read and write data with isolation between clients" public class Client extends Thread { ... void run() { Socket socket = new Socket("localhost", 1234); doIO(socket); } } public class Server extends Thread { ... void run() { // serverSocket on "localhost", 1234 Socket clientSock = serverSocket.accept(); executor.execute(new ClientWorker(clientSock)); } } Now can I have multiple Client instances on different threads trying to connect on the same port of the current machine? For example, Server s = new Server("localhost", 1234); s.start(); Client[] c = new Client[10]; for (int i = 0; i < c.length; ++i) { c.start(); }

    Read the article

  • Circular database relationships. Good, Bad, Exceptions?

    - by jim
    I have been putting off developing this part of my app for sometime purely because I want to do this in a circular way but get the feeling its a bad idea from what I remember my lecturers telling me back in school. I have a design for an order system, ignoring the everything that doesn't pertain to this example I'm left with: CreditCard Customer Order I want it so that, Customers can have credit cards (0-n) Customers have orders (1-n) Orders have one customer(1-1) Orders have one credit card(1-1) Credit cards can have one customer(1-1) (unique ids so we can ignore uniqueness of cc number, husband/wife may share cc instances ect) Basically the last part is where the issue shows up, sometimes credit cards are declined and they wish to use a different one, this needs to update which their 'current' card is but this can only change the current card used for that order, not the other orders the customer may have on disk. Effectively this creates a circular design between the three tables. Possible solutions: Either Create the circular design, give references: cc ref to order, customer ref to cc customer ref to order or customer ref to cc customer ref to order create new table that references all three table ids and put unique on the order so that only one cc may be current to that order at any time Essentially both model the same design but translate differently, I am liking the latter option best at this point in time because it seems less circular and more central. (If that even makes sense) My questions are, What if any are the pros and cons of each? What is the pitfalls of circular relationships/dependancies? Is this a valid exception to the rule? Is there any reason I should pick the former over the latter? Thanks and let me know if there is anything you need clarified/explained. --Update/Edit-- I have noticed an error in the requirements I stated. Basically dropped the ball when trying to simplify things for SO. There is another table there for Payments which adds another layer. The catch, Orders can have multiple payments, with the possibility of using different credit cards. (if you really want to know even other forms of payment). Stating this here because I think the underlying issue is still the same and this only really adds another layer of complexity.

    Read the article

  • Multiple has_many's of the same model

    - by Koning Baard
    I have these models: Person has_many :messages_form_person, :foreign_key => :from_user_id, :class_name => :messages has_many :messages_to_person, :foreign_key => :to_user_id, :class_name => :messages Message belongs_to :to_person, :foreign_key => :to_user_id, :class_name => :person belongs_to :from_person, :foreign_key => :to_user_id, :class_name => :person And this view: person#show <% @person.messages_to_person.each do |message| %> <%=h message.title %> <% end %> But I get this error: TypeError in People#show Showing app/views/people/show.html.erb where line #26 raised: can't convert Symbol into String Extracted source (around line #26): 23: <%=h @person.biography %> 24: </p> 25: 26: <% @person.messages_to_person.each do |message| %> 27: 28: <% end %> 29: I basicly want that people can send eachother messages. Can anyone help me? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Problem in mutiple :dependent=> :destroy when multiple polymorphic is true

    - by piemesons
    I have four models question, answer, comment and vote.Consider it same as stackoverflow. Question has_many comments Answers has_many comments Questions has_many votes answers has_many votes comments has_many votes Here are the models (only relevant things) class Comment < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :commentable, :polymorphic => true has_many :votes, :as => :votable, :dependent => :destroy end class Question < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :comments, :as => :commentable, :dependent => :destroy has_many :answers, :dependent => :destroy has_many :votes, :as => :votable, :dependent => :destroy end class Vote < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :votable, :polymorphic => true end class Answer < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :question, :counter_cache => true has_many :comments, :as => :commentable , :dependent => :destroy end Now the problem is whenever i am trying to delete any question/answer/comment its giving me an error NoMethodError in QuestionsController#destroy undefined method `each' for 0:Fixnum if i remove this line from any of the model (question/answer/comment) has_many :votes, :as => :votable, :dependent => :destroy then it works perfectly. It seems there is a problem while deleting the records active record is not able to find out the proper path because of multiple joins within the tables.

    Read the article

  • IPhone CoreData: How should I relate many child entities to thier parents

    - by Robert
    I am trying to import data from a database that uses primary key / forign key relations to a core data database in Xcode. I have code that creates hundreds of child entities in a managed object context: Each child has an ID that corresponds to a parent. child1 parentID = 3 child2 parentID = 17 child3 parentID = 17 ... childn parentID = 5 I now need to relate each child to its parent. The parents are all stored in persistent memory. My first thought was to preform a fetch for each child to get its parent. However, I think this would be slow. Am I correct? How should I do this instead?

    Read the article

  • MySQL - Find entries that refer to a specified index.

    - by Conor H
    Hi, So I have a booking system where I have a 'lesson_type' table with 'lesson_type_id' as PK. I have a constraint in place here so I can't delete a lesson_type if there are bookings made for that lesson_type. I would like to be able to determine if this lesson_type_id is being referred to by any entries in the bookings table (or any other table for that matter) so I can notify the user gracefully. i.e. not have a mysql error be thrown when they try and delete a record. What kind of query would I use for this? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Validate dependent model validation and show error message.

    - by piemesons
    Just taking a simple example. We have a question on stackoverflow and while posting a question we want to validate title_of_question, description_of_question that they should be present. Now we have a another model tag having habtm relationshio with question model. How to validate that while saving the question. Means question must have some tags. here the code:-- Models:-- class Question < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :user has_and_belongs_to_many :tags has_many :comments, :as => :commentable has_many :answers, :dependent => :destroy validates_presence_of :title, :content, :user_id end class Tag < ActiveRecord::Base has_and_belongs_to_many :questions validates_presence_of :tag end Form for entering question and tag <div class="form"> <% form_for :question ,@question, :url => {:action => "create" } do |f| %> <fieldset> <%= f.error_messages %> <legend>Post a question</legend> <div> <%= f.label :title %>: <%= f.text_field :title, :size => 100 %> </div> <div> <%= f.label :content ,'Question' %>: <%= f.text_area :content, :rows => 10, :cols => 100 %> </div> <div> <%= label_tag 'tags' %>: <%= text_field_tag 'tag' ,'',:size=> 60 %> add multiple tag using comma </div> <div> <%= submit_tag "Post question" %> </div> </fieldset> <% end %> </div> From Controller.. (Right now question will be saved without validating tag) def create @question = Question.new(params[:question]) @question.user_id=session[:user_id] if @question.save flash[:notice] = "Question has been posted." redirect_to question_index_path else render :action => "new" end end questions_tags table has been created. One approach is creating a virtual column using attribute accessors. another approach is validate associated. right now assuming new tags can be created.(but not duplicate).

    Read the article

  • Open Source - EER Modeling Tool

    - by Nick Fergis
    Is there a good open source or reasonably priced EER modeling tool for MySQL besides MySQL Workbench? I find the MySQL Workbench interface to be clunky. I would like to be able to manage my production schema beginning all design changes in the EER and propogating those out to my schema for created and altered tables. Is anyone use a tool they love to manage their environments in this way? Thanks. - Nick

    Read the article

  • How to add a new entry to a multiple has_many association?

    - by siulamvictor
    I am not sure am I doing these correct. I have 3 models, Account, User, and Event. Account contains a group of Users. Each User have its own username and password for login, but they can access the same Account data under the same Account. Events is create by a User, which other Users in the same Account can also read or edit it. I created the following migrations and models. User migration class CreateUsers < ActiveRecord::Migration def self.up create_table :users do |t| t.integer :account_id t.string :username t.string :password t.timestamps end end def self.down drop_table :users end end Account migration class CreateAccounts < ActiveRecord::Migration def self.up create_table :accounts do |t| t.string :name t.timestamps end end def self.down drop_table :accounts end end Event migration class CreateEvents < ActiveRecord::Migration def self.up create_table :events do |t| t.integer :account_id t.integer :user_id t.string :name t.string :location t.timestamps end end def self.down drop_table :events end end Account model class Account < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :users has_many :events end User model class User < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :account end Event model class Event < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :account belongs_to :user end so.... Is this setting correct? Every time when a user create a new account, the system will ask for the user information, e.g. username and password. How can I add them into correct tables? How can I add a new event? I am sorry for such a long question. I am not very understand the rails way in handling such data structure. Thank you guys for answering me. :)

    Read the article

  • cache_counter for habtm

    - by piemesons
    Hello How can use cache_counter in a habtm. For example a question has many tags and a tag can belong to many questions. question habtm tags Now i want to find out number of questions belonging to every tag. One way is counting everytime. But, in case of one_to_many i done same thing in this way. Like one question has many answers. then in answer model i specified belongs_to :question,:cache_counter=>true It solved my problem. So how to do the same in habtm.

    Read the article

  • What's does "cardinality of an relationship" mean in Core Data?

    - by dontWatchMyProfile
    From the docs: If all of a managed object's relationship delete rules are Nullify, then for that object at least there is no additional work to do (you may have to consider other objects that were at the destination of the relationship—if the inverse relationship was either mandatory or had a lower limit on cardinality, then the destination object or objects might be in an invalid state). Does someone have an example of this cardinality thing? What's this good for and what's important to know about this? (sounds very important...)

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27  | Next Page >