Search Results

Search found 30309 results on 1213 pages for 'object relationships'.

Page 35/1213 | < Previous Page | 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  | Next Page >

  • Foreign Key Relationships and "belongs to many"

    - by jan
    I have the following model: S belongs to T T has many S A,B,C,D,E (etc) have 1 T each, so the T should belong to each of A,B,C,D,E (etc) At first I set up my foreign keys so that in A, fk_a_t would be the foreign key on A.t to T(id), in B it'd be fk_b_t, etc. Everything looks fine in my UML (using MySQLWorkBench), but generating the yii models results in it thinking that T has many A,B,C,D (etc) which to me is the reverse. It sounds to me like either I need to have A_T, B_T, C_T (etc) tables, but this would be a pain as there are a lot of tables that have this relationship. I've also googled that the better way to do this would be some sort of behavior, such that A,B,C,D (etc) can behave as a T, but I'm not clear on exactly how to do this (I will continue to google more on this) What do you think is the better solution? UML: Here's the DDL (auto generated). Just pretend that there is more than 3 tables referencing T. -- ----------------------------------------------------- -- Table `mydb`.`T` -- ----------------------------------------------------- CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `mydb`.`T` ( `id` INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT , PRIMARY KEY (`id`) ) ENGINE = InnoDB; -- ----------------------------------------------------- -- Table `mydb`.`S` -- ----------------------------------------------------- CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `mydb`.`S` ( `id` INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT , `thing` VARCHAR(45) NULL , `t` INT NOT NULL , PRIMARY KEY (`id`) , INDEX `fk_S_T` (`id` ASC) , CONSTRAINT `fk_S_T` FOREIGN KEY (`id` ) REFERENCES `mydb`.`T` (`id` ) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION) ENGINE = InnoDB; -- ----------------------------------------------------- -- Table `mydb`.`A` -- ----------------------------------------------------- CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `mydb`.`A` ( `id` INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT , `T` INT NOT NULL , `stuff` VARCHAR(45) NULL , `bar` VARCHAR(45) NULL , `foo` VARCHAR(45) NULL , PRIMARY KEY (`id`) , INDEX `fk_A_T` (`T` ASC) , CONSTRAINT `fk_A_T` FOREIGN KEY (`T` ) REFERENCES `mydb`.`T` (`id` ) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION) ENGINE = InnoDB; -- ----------------------------------------------------- -- Table `mydb`.`B` -- ----------------------------------------------------- CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `mydb`.`B` ( `id` INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT , `T` INT NOT NULL , `stuff2` VARCHAR(45) NULL , `foobar` VARCHAR(45) NULL , `other` VARCHAR(45) NULL , PRIMARY KEY (`id`) , INDEX `fk_A_T` (`T` ASC) , CONSTRAINT `fk_A_T` FOREIGN KEY (`T` ) REFERENCES `mydb`.`T` (`id` ) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION) ENGINE = InnoDB; -- ----------------------------------------------------- -- Table `mydb`.`C` -- ----------------------------------------------------- CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `mydb`.`C` ( `id` INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT , `T` INT NOT NULL , `stuff3` VARCHAR(45) NULL , `foobar2` VARCHAR(45) NULL , `other4` VARCHAR(45) NULL , PRIMARY KEY (`id`) , INDEX `fk_A_T` (`T` ASC) , CONSTRAINT `fk_A_T` FOREIGN KEY (`T` ) REFERENCES `mydb`.`T` (`id` ) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION) ENGINE = InnoDB;

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework doesn't like 0..1 to * relationships.

    - by Orion Adrian
    I have a database framework where I have two tables. The first table has a single column that is an identity and primary key. The second table contains two columns. One is a nvarchar primary key and the other is a nullable foreign key to the first table. On the default import of the database I get the following error: Condition cannot be specified for Column member 'ForeignKeyId' because it is marked with a 'Computed' or 'Identity' StoreGeneratedPattern. where ForeignKeyId is the second foreign key reference in the second table. Is this just something the entity model doesn't do? Or am I missing something?

    Read the article

  • Parent Child Relationships with Fluent NHibernate?

    - by ElHaix
    I would like to create a cascading tree/list of N number of children for a given parent, where a child can also become a parent. Given the following data structure: CountryType=1; ColorType=3; StateType=5 6,7,8 = {Can, US, Mex} 10, 11, 12 = {Red, White, Blue} 20,21,22= {California, Florida, Alberta} TreeID ListTypeID ParentTreeID ListItemID 1 1 Null 6 (Canada is a Country) 2 1 Null 7 (US is a Country) 3 1 Null 8 (Mexico is a Country) 4 3 3 10 (Mexico has Red) 5 3 3 11 (Mexico has White) 6 5 1 22 (Alberta is in Canada) 7 5 7 20 (California is in US) 8 5 7 21 (Florida is in US) 9 3 6 10 (Alberta is Red) 10 3 6 12 (Alberta is Blue) 11 3 2 10 (US is Red) 12 3 2 11 (Us is Blue) How would this be represented in Fluent NHibernate classes? Some direction would be appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Modeling objects with multiple table relationships in Zend Framework

    - by andybaird
    I'm toying with Zend Framework and trying to use the "QuickStart" guide against a website I'm making just to see how the process would work. Forgive me if this answer is obvious, hopefully someone experienced can shed some light on this. I have three database tables: CREATE TABLE `users` ( `id` int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment, `email` varchar(255) NOT NULL, `username` varchar(255) NOT NULL default '', `first` varchar(128) NOT NULL default '', `last` varchar(128) NOT NULL default '', `gender` enum('M','F') default NULL, `birthyear` year(4) default NULL, `postal` varchar(16) default NULL, `auth_method` enum('Default','OpenID','Facebook','Disabled') NOT NULL default 'Default', PRIMARY KEY (`id`), UNIQUE KEY `email` (`email`), UNIQUE KEY `username` (`username`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 CREATE TABLE `user_password` ( `user_id` int(11) NOT NULL, `password` varchar(16) NOT NULL default '', PRIMARY KEY (`user_id`), UNIQUE KEY `user_id` (`user_id`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 CREATE TABLE `user_metadata` ( `user_id` int(11) NOT NULL default '0', `signup_date` datetime default NULL, `signup_ip` varchar(15) default NULL, `last_login_date` datetime default NULL, `last_login_ip` varchar(15) default NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`user_id`), UNIQUE KEY `user_id` (`user_id`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 I want to create a User model that uses all three tables in certain situations. E.g., the metadata table is accessed if/when the meta data is needed. The user_password table is accessed only if the 'Default' auth_method is set. I'll likely be adding a profile table later on that I would like to be able to access from the user model. What is the best way to do this with ZF and why?

    Read the article

  • Zend Framework table Relationships

    - by Uffo
    I have a table with over 4 million rows, I want to split this table in more tables, i.e one table with 50k rows. I also need to perform a search on these tables, whats the best way to do it? with JOIN, or? do you have some better ideas? Best Regards,

    Read the article

  • What is the best solution to do Reporting on Object data for .NET ?

    - by Peter Fox
    Hi, Our projects are using objects as the data source to reports. Our business layer is returning single objects or IEnumerable. Our reports (quite complex) need to display value-type properties of the object, and its related objects. Typical case would be, from a List, display a master report with category data, then a subreport with data for each Product inside each Category, then a subreport for each Part of each Product, and so on. Reporting from the database is not an option for us. We have tried so far - Reporting Services : works but have to mess around with the XML definition of the report to define the datasource classes, very hard to work with if you use an object datasource, architecturally not too clean - Telerik Reports : quite nice (esp., nice architecture) but seems to have problems with complex reports (master/sub), does not give great paging control, rumored to have performance/crash problems (immature product). Does anyone know a good reporting solution that can be integrated in an ASP.NET application and works well with objects as datasources ?

    Read the article

  • NHibernate collections: many-to-many relationships

    - by Brad Heller
    I've got two models, a Product model and a ShoppingCart model. The ShoppingCart model has a collection of products as a property called Products (List). Here is the mapping for my ShoppingCart model. <class name="MyProject.ShoppingCart, MyProject" table="ShoppingCarts"> <id name="Id" column="Id"> <generator class="native" /> </id> <many-to-one name="Company" class="MyProject.Company, MyProject" column="CompanyId" /> <property name="ExternalId" column="GUID" generated="insert" /> <property name="Name" column="Name" /> <property name="Total" column="Total" /> <property name="CreationDate" column="CreationDate" generated="insert" /> <property name="UpdatedDate" column="UpdatedDate" generated="always" /> <bag name="Products" table="ShoppingCartContents" lazy="false"> <key column="ShoppingCartId" /> <many-to-many column="ProductId" class="MyProjectMyProject.Product, MyProject" fetch="join" /> </bag> </class> When I try to save to the DB, the ShoppingCart is saved, but the mapping rows in ShoppingCartContents aren't save, making me thing that there's an issue with the mapping. Where am I going wrong here?

    Read the article

  • What's an easy way to set up object communication in Obj-C?

    - by seaworthy
    I am trying to send a slider value from a controller object to a method of a model object. The later is implemented in the separate file and I have appropriate headers. I think the problem is that I am not sure how to instantiate the receiver in order to produce a working method for the controller. Here is the controller's method. -(IBAction)setValue:(id)slider {[Model setValue:[slider floatValue]];} @implementation Model -(void)setValue:(float)n{ printf("%f",n); } @end What I get is 'Model' may not respond to '+setValue' warning and no output in my console. Any insight is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Core Data and Relationships

    - by alku83
    I have two objects, a Trip and a Place. A Trip represents a journey from one Place to another Place, ie. a Trip needs a fromPlace and a toPlace. So, this is a 1-to-2 relationship, but I need to know which is the "from" and which is the "to". I am not sure how to model this in Core Data. I have created two entities (Trip, Place), and now I want to setup the relationship(s) so I have a fromPlace and a toPlace. Do I need to add an extra field on the Place entity called isFrom, or similar? If this was in a database, I would just have a id column on the Place table, and then two columns in the Trip table - fromPlaceId and toPlaceId. How do I achieve something similar in Core Data?

    Read the article

  • Why implement DB connection pointer object as a reference counting pointer? (C++)

    - by DVK
    At our company one of the core C++ classes (Database connection pointer) is implemented as a reference counting pointer. To be clear, the objects are NOT DB connections themselves, but pointers to a DB connection object. The library is very old, and nobody who designed is around anymore. So far, nether I, nor any C++ experts in the company that I asked have come up with a good reason for why this particular design was chosen. Any ideas? It is introducing some problems (partially due to awful reference pointer implementation used), and I'm trying to understand if this design actually has some deep underlying reasons? The usage pattern these days seems to be that the DB connection pointer object is returned by a DB connection manager class, and it's somewhat unclear whether DB connection pointers were designed to be able to be used independently of DB connection manager.

    Read the article

  • Using HABTM relationships in cakephp plugins with unique set to false

    - by Dean
    I am working on a plugin for our CakePHP CMS that will handle blogs. When getting to the tags I needed to set the HABTM relationship to unique = false to be able add tags to a post without having to reset them all. The BlogPost model looks like this class BlogPost extends AppModel { var $name = 'BlogPost'; var $actsAs = array('Core.WhoDidIt', 'Containable'); var $hasMany = array('Blog.BlogPostComment'); var $hasAndBelongsToMany = array('Blog.BlogTag' => array('unique' => false), 'Blog.BlogCategory'); } The BlogTag model looks like this class BlogTag extends AppModel { var $name = 'BlogTag'; var $actsAs = array('Containable'); var $hasAndBelongsToMany = array('Blog.BlogPost'); } The SQL error I am getting when I have the unique = true setting in the HABTM relationship between the BlogPost and BlogTag is Query: SELECT `Blog`.`BlogTag`.`id`, `Blog`.`BlogTag`.`name`, `Blog`.`BlogTag`.`slug`, `Blog`.`BlogTag`.`created_by`, `Blog`.`BlogTag`.`modified_by`, `Blog`.`BlogTag`.`created`, `Blog`.`BlogTag`.`modified`, `BlogPostsBlogTag`.`blog_post_id`, `BlogPostsBlogTag`.`blog_tag_id` FROM `blog_tags` AS `Blog`.`BlogTag` JOIN `blog_posts_blog_tags` AS `BlogPostsBlogTag` ON (`BlogPostsBlogTag`.`blog_post_id` = 4 AND `BlogPostsBlogTag`.`blog_tag_id` = `Blog`.`BlogTag`.`id`) As you can see it is trying to set the blog_tags table to 'Blog'.'BlogTag. which isn't a valid MySQL name. When I remove the unique = true from the relationship it all works find and I can save one tag but when adding another it just erases the first one and puts the new one in its place. Does anyone have any ideas? is it a bug or am I just missing something? Cheers, Dean

    Read the article

  • Rails: using find method to access joined tables for polymorphic relationships

    - by DJTripleThreat
    Ok, I have a generic TimeSlot model that deals with a start_at and an end_at for time spans. A couple models derive from this but I'm referring to one in this question: AppointmentBlock which is a collection of Appointments. I want to validate an AppointmentBlock such that no other AppointmentBlocks have been scheduled for a particular Employee in the same time frame. Since AppointmentBlock has a polymorphic association with TimeSlot, you have to access the AppointmentBlock's start_at and end_at through the TimeSlot like so: appt_block.time_slot.start_at This means that I need to have some kind of join in my :conditions for my find() method call. Here is my code so far: #inside my appointment_block.rb model validate :employee_not_double_booked def employee_not_double_booked unless self.employee_id # this find's condition is incorrect because I need to join time_slots to get access # to start_at and end_at. How can I do this? blocks = AppointmentBlock.find(:first, :conditions => ['employee_id = ? and (start_at between ? and ? or end_at between ? and ?)', self.employee_id, self.time_slot.start_at, self.time_slot.end_at, self.time_slot.start_at, self.time_slot.end_at]) # pseudo code: # collect a list of appointment blocks that end after this # apointment block starts or start before this appointment # block ends that are also associated with this appointment # blocks assigned employee # if the count is great then 0 the employee has been double # booked. # if a block was found that means this employee is getting # double booked so raise an error errors.add "AppointmentBlock", "has already been scheduled during this time" if blocks end end Since AppointmentBlock doesn't have a start_at or an end_at how can I join with the time_slots table to get those conditions to work?

    Read the article

  • Object reference not set to an instance of an object - how to find the offending object name in the

    - by Jason
    This is the bane of my programming existence. After deploying an application, when this error crops up, no amount of debug dump tells you WHAT object was not instantiated. I have the call stack, that's great, it tells me roughly where the object is, but is there any way to get .NET to tell me the actual name of the object? If you catch them while debugging, of course the program breaks right on the offending creature, but if it happens after the program is in the wild, good luck. There has to be a way. I've explored the exceptions returned in these instances and there is just nothing helpful.

    Read the article

  • CoreData: Sort and Section on Relationships

    - by David.Chu.ca
    I have two questions about using Core Data. Taking the typical case of Employee and Department as an example. The Employee entity has a relationship field "deparment" as to-one to Department, and the Department entity has a relationship "employee" as to-many to Employee entity. I would like to display all the employees in a TableView in sections of department's names. I think that the NSFetchedResultsController should use Employee as entity. I am not sure how to use Department's name as a sort criteria, since it is in an employee's relationship field department's name. Can you use "DepartmentName" as a sort and add this to Employee entity class as a method which will return department's name for a given employee? The second question is the section name. I would like to use department names as sections. Can I use the above method as sectionKeyPath's value for the NSFethedResultsController? Not sure if I am on the right track.

    Read the article

  • Mapping relationships from multiple databases in NHibernate

    - by mannish
    I have a multi-database application configured with NHibernate. The entities that correspond to tables from each database are in their own separate assemblies (an assembly per database if you will). I have a need/desire to relate an entity from one database to an entity of another database. Everything up to this point works as I want it to (the application handles multiple session factories, etc.). The relationship I want is many-to-one, but in reality my application only cares about one side of the relationship (for reasons that aren't relevant). The relevant entities are Project and PMProject, where a Project HAS A PMProject. When I map the many-to-one, I get the following error: NHibernate.MappingException: An association from the table PROJECTS refers to an unmapped class: SDMS.PPRM.PMProject The Project mapping itself reads (ignore the funky column naming; it's an Oracle db): <many-to-one name="PMProject" class="SDMS.PPRM.PMProject" column="PM_PROJECT_ID" cascade="none" /> In the class attribute, I'm referencing the appropriate assembly, but I get that error which seems to tell me it simply can't find the mapping file for PMProject. But that file exists (it's set as embedded resource), the session factory instantiation works without fail; so I'm at a loss on how to tell the Project mapping how/where to look for the appropriate mapping. Is there something I'm missing? A better way to go about this? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Database Design for One to One relationships

    - by Greelmo
    I'm trying to finalize my design of the data model for my project, and am having difficulty figuring out which way to go with it. I have a table of users, and an undetermined number of attributes that apply to that user. The attributes are in almost every case optional, so null values are allowed. Each of these attributes are one to one for the user. Should I put them on the same table, and keep adding columns when attributes are added (making the user table quite wide), or should I put each attribute on a separate table with a foreign key to the user table. I have decided against using the EAV model. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • iPhone Core Data - Access deep attributes with to many relationships

    - by ncohen
    Hi everyone, Let say I have an entity user which has a one to many relationship with the entity menu which has a one to many relationship with the entity meal which has a many to one relationship with the entity recipe which has a one to many relationship with the entity element. What I would like to do is to select the elements which belong to a particular user (username = myUsername) and particular menu*s* (minDate < menu.date < maxDate). Does anyone have an idea how to get them? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Django: query spanning multiple many-to-many relationships

    - by Brant
    I've got some models set up like this: class AppGroup(models.Model): users = models.ManyToManyField(User) class Notification(models.Model): groups_to_notify = models.ManyToManyField(AppGroup) The User objects come from django's authentication system. Now, I am trying to get all the notifications pertaining to the groups that the current user is a part of. I have tried.. notifications = Notification.objects.filter(groups_to_notify=AppGroup.objects.filter(users=request.user)) But that gives an error: more than one row returned by a subquery used as an expression Which I suppose is because the groups_to_notify is checking against several groups. How can I grab all the notifications meant for the user based on the groups he is a part of?

    Read the article

  • Is this Javascript object literal key restriction strictly due to parsing?

    - by George Jempty
    Please refer to the code below, when I "comment in" either of the commented out lines, it causes the error (in IE) of "':' expected". So then is my conclusion correct, that this inability to provide a reference to an object value, as an object key in a string literal; is this strictly an interpreter/parsing issue? Is this a candidate for an awful (or at least "bad") "part" of Javascript, in contrast to Crockford's "good parts"? <script> var keys = {'ONE': 'one'}; //causes error: //var obj1 = {keys.ONE: 'value1'}; //var obj1 = {keys['ONE']: 'value1'}; //works var obj1 = {}; obj1[keys.ONE] = 'value1'; //also works var key_one = keys.ONE; var obj2 = {key_one: 'value1'}; </script>

    Read the article

  • Doctrine 1.2 Column Naming Conventions for Many To Many Relationships

    - by Alan Storm
    I'm working with an existing database schema, and trying to setup two Doctrine models with a Many to Many relationship, as described in this document When creating tables from scratch, I have no trouble getting this working. However, the existing join tables use a different naming convention that what's described in the Doctrine document. Specifically Table 1 -------------------------------------------------- table_1_id ....other columns.... Table 2 -------------------------------------------------- table_2_id ....other columns.... Join Table -------------------------------------------------- fktable1_id fktable_2_id Basically, the previous developers prefaced all forign keys with an fk. From the examples I've seen and some brief experimenting with code, it appears that Doctrine 1.2 requires that the join table use the same column names as the tables it's joining in Is my assumption correct? If so, has the situation changed in Doctrine 2? If the answers to either of the above are true, how do you configure the models so that all the columns "line up"

    Read the article

  • Is this a good way to identify the type of a javascript object?

    - by FK82
    Apparently neither instanceof nor typeof deliver in terms of correctly identifying the type of every javascript object. I have come up with this function and I'm looking for some feedback: function getType() { var input = arguments[0] ; var types = ["String","Array","Object","Function","HTML"] ; //!! of the top of my head for(var n=0; n < types.length; n++) { if( input.constructor.toString().indexOf( types[n] ) != -1) { document.write( types[n] ) ; } } } Thanks for reading!

    Read the article

  • EF Code First - Relationships

    - by CaffGeek
    I have these classes public class EntityBase : IEntity { public int Id { get; set; } public DateTime Created { get; set; } public string CreatedBy { get; set; } public DateTime Updated { get; set; } public string UpdatedBy { get; set; } } public class EftInterface : EntityBase { public string Name { get; set; } public Provider Provider { get; set; } public List<BusinessUnit> BusinessUnits { get; set; } } public class Provider : EntityBase, IEntity { public string Name { get; set; } public decimal DefaultDebitLimit { get; set; } public decimal DefaultCreditLimit { get; set; } public decimal TreasuryDebitLimit { get; set; } public decimal TreasuryCreditLimit { get; set; } } public class BusinessUnit : EntityBase { public string Name { get; set; } } An interface, is really a Provider, with a collection of Business Units. The issue is that while my db model ends up having a correct EftInterfaces table, with a FK to Provider_Id, the BusinessUnits table has a FK to EftInterface_Id. But, a BusinessUnit can be included in more than one EftInterface. I need a many to many relationship. A BusinessUnit can be part of many EftInterfaces, and an EftInterface can contain many BusinessUnits. How can I get CodeFirst to generate the many-to-many table?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  | Next Page >