Re: HABTM in rc3 need now field id in link table.

Sorry to answer a question with a question...

What query would Cake ever need to do to that table where it needed to
pick out a single row without knowing the two ids (e.g. article_id,
tag_id)?
I am of-course talking ab out a "clean" join table. Not one with extra
fields in it. If you make a unique index (or a composite primary key)
of the two id fields you prevent duplicate rows and that is all that
is needed for that table. If, on the other hand, the table has extra
fields (something Cake has previously not supported) and used as a
"real" model, then I certainly see the need for a pk.

btw: a composite pk has in my experience never caused any problems. I
have used that since before 1.0 went stable.

On Oct 29, 8:51 pm, teknoid <teknoid.cake...@gmail.com> wrote:
> How else would ensure uniqueness of records if cake does not/will not
> support composite keys?
>
> On Oct 29, 3:42 pm, "martin.westin...@gmail.com"
>
> <martin.westin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't really agree with the "should" part. For a "standard" join
> > table I see no reason for an extra id, and I have not noticed of heard
> > of such a requirement before.
>
> > Also, when a decision is taken to start requiring a single-field pk in
> > join-tables I would have expected a bit more of a heads-up about it.
> > Any new feature that changes the behavior (not halting on an error but
> > just silently acting differently) of old code will naturally be
> > thought of as a bug by users if there is no clear indication about the
> > changed behavior.
>
> > About the tests: they are usually the place people get directed to to
> > find out the "true" implementation of any feature. It is also the
> > standard reply to any bug-report (That the tests pass). So I would not
> > expect them to be out of date in that way. But it is of-course
> > possible.
>
> > If anyone has  link to a document on the change in requirement, I
> > would be grateful. It could be a good read.
>
> > /Martin
>
> > On Oct 29, 6:34 pm, teknoid <teknoid.cake...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Even if those test pass (due to their nature), a primary key column
> > > should be created in a vast majority of cases.
>
> > > p.s. It could also be that the tests need to be updated.
>
> > > On Oct 29, 4:34 am, "martin.westin...@gmail.com"
>
> > > <martin.westin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Teknoid, you may be right but the fixtures for the tests in the core
> > > > create loin tables without a pk.
> > > > E.g:
> > > > var $fields = array(
> > > >     'article_id' => array('type' => 'integer', 'null' => false),
> > > >     'tag_id' => array('type' => 'integer', 'null' => false),
> > > >     'indexes' => array('UNIQUE_TAG' => array('column'=>
> > > > array('article_id', 'tag_id'), 'unique'=>1))
> > > > );
>
> > > > /Martin
>
> > > > On Oct 28, 3:56 pm, Alexandru <alexandru...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > no no in rc2 this was on manual
> > > > > Recipe HABTM Tag  => recipes_tags.recipe_id, recipes_tags.tag_id
> > > > > BUT now they changed in manual and put this
> > > > > Recipe HABTM Tag  => id,recipes_tags.recipe_id, recipes_tags.tag_id
>
> > > > > now i know for sure it is NOT a BUG.
>
> > > > > TOPIC CLOSED
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CakePHP" group.
To post to this group, send email to cake-php@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to cake-php+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---