Em 02-12-2011 12:47, James B. Byrne escreveu:
> On Fri, December 2, 2011 06:32, Rodrigo Rosenfeld RosasSure James, sorry about that. I should have read it more carefully.
>> Em 01-12-2011 23:28, matthuhiggins escreveu:
>>> it should be noted that the update I offered has zero
>>> effect on those not using foreign keys. It's also worth
>>> suggesting that the initial version can start with no
>>> cascading options, so that all application logic is
>>> kept in the application, and the foreign keys
>>> act as a neutral constraint similar to NOT NULL.
>> I don't think this is right. A foreign key could be null.
>> If you don't want it to be null you should be explicit
>> about it
> I do not think that is what the OP means. I believe that
> he is trying to say that implementing a non-cascading Fk
> at the DBMS level can be considered a 'backstop' to any
> application logic in (or missing from) the model. This
> may be considered similar to how the NOT NULL constraint
> at the DBMS level is presently used inside AR. It just
> catches logic errors before they hit the DB.
And I also think that we should be explicit about cascading too while
Even in the database level, cascading (null or delete) should not be
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.