FYI - contributions - Composite Foreign Keys, Composite indexes

[Trellian]

Hi Sam,

Just to let you know, I'm busy adding support for composite Foreign Keys and indexes, will issue a pull request shortly :)

Cheers,
Adrian

[samkirton]

Hi Adrian,

That is great to hear! Could you rebase your changes with the latest master? Last week I added changes for Primary Keys.

Cheers,
Sam

[Trellian]

Sam,

Yes, I have already pulled in the Primary Key changes. You pipped me to the post there, I
had done exactly the same as you for the primary keys.

The way I have structured it, @column no longer has the index= option, they are table
based now. Are you ok with that?

Regards,
Adrian

On 17 Sep 2016 09:13, Samuel Kirton wrote:

Hi Adrian,

That is great to hear! Could you rebase your changes with the latest master? Last week I
added changes for Primary Keys.

Cheers,
Sam

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#18 (comment), or mute the
thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABCOrAjuu9QXe9sfCSnfmjQHewWPM_RIks5qq5L9gaJpZM4J_hpM.

[samkirton]

hmmm I think I preferred index in @column, I assume if you have it in @table you must reference the column by a name string? This has more room for a typo. What do you think?

Sam

[Trellian]

I agree, but how else to build composite indexes?

Adrian

On 17 Sep 2016 09:18, Samuel Kirton wrote:

hmmm I think I preferred index in @column https://github.com/Column, I assume if you
have it in @table https://github.com/Table you must reference the column by a name
string? This has more room for a typo. What do you think?

Sam

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#18 (comment), or mute the
thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABCOrE15XLjphBHYRUvHIM2DJKt4ZLclks5qq5RbgaJpZM4J_hpM.

[Trellian]

I guess it's about the same amount of room for typos as defining indexes in SQL DDL?

Adrian

On 17 Sep 2016 09:18, Samuel Kirton wrote:

hmmm I think I preferred index in @column https://github.com/Column, I assume if you
have it in @table https://github.com/Table you must reference the column by a name
string? This has more room for a typo. What do you think?

Sam

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#18 (comment), or mute the
thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABCOrE15XLjphBHYRUvHIM2DJKt4ZLclks5qq5RbgaJpZM4J_hpM.

[samkirton]

Would it be possible to have the functionality in both? Basic users can stick to @column and more advanced users can define their composite as part of @table?

[Trellian]

Yes. I will make it so ;)

Adrian

On 17 Sep 2016 09:21, Samuel Kirton wrote:

Would it be possible to have the functionality in both? Basic users can stick to @column
https://github.com/Column and more advanced users can define their composite as part
of @table https://github.com/Table?

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#18 (comment), or mute the
thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABCOrE2cV_iCEfg9Ex6AL6utgNW6Zg5gks5qq5TogaJpZM4J_hpM.

[samkirton]

ok great, also it would be great if you could write some integration tests in the client project that satisfy the implementation :)

[Trellian]

I'll give it a shot... I'm new to the integration test scene, and also new to contributing
via Git, so there might be a few screw-ups along the way that I might need help with. Some
git concepts still confuse the heck out of me.

I've obviously been following your code for the testing, will atempt to do it the same
way. I'm a little short on time though, since this is a production project, but I'm really
enjoying contributing.

I wrote many, many DB templates in Clarion's template language, and I have a bushel full
of ideas and additions for SQLking.

/Adrian

On 17 Sep 2016 09:23, Samuel Kirton wrote:

ok great, also it would be great if you could write some integration tests in the client
project that satisfy the implementation :)

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#18 (comment), or mute the
thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABCOrOIJauSfcB-H97KM0_QpSMacaIFIks5qq5VvgaJpZM4J_hpM.

[samkirton]

If you are going to use the new version in production its especially important that we get the integration test coverage, this is something I can write if you are short on time. Have you been running the existing test suite while you have been developing? This will catch any regression issues early on.

Cheers,
Sam

[Trellian]

Yes, I agree. I've been running the existing tests, and have also corrected a bug in
CREATE TABLE that was leaving off the last character before the closing ');' in some cases
(possibly caused by me)

/Adrian

On 17 Sep 2016 09:32, Samuel Kirton wrote:

If you are going to use the new version in production its especially important that we
get the integration test coverage, this is something I can write if you are short on
time. Have you been running the existing test suite while you have been developing? This
will catch any regression issues early on.

Cheers,
Sam

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#18 (comment), or mute the
thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABCOrNu2cgBVmPCmfa2C-gwWtIRXC-JJks5qq5emgaJpZM4J_hpM.

[samkirton]

ok great!