in reply to Re: Class::DBI cascading delete problem?
in thread Class::DBI cascading delete problem?

It appears you want to use this second form for your table structure. You did some of the time, but not others, so maybe it's just a mis-copy.
I was under the understanding (perhaps incorrect?) that C:DBI will look for corresponding has_a declerations?
When setting up the relationship we examine the foreign class's has_a() declarations to discover which of its columns reference our class... If no such has_a() declarations can be found, or none link to us, we assume that it is linking to us via a column named after the moniker() of our class. If this is not true you can pass an additional third argument to the has_many() declaration stating which column of the foreign class references us.

(from C:DBI Docs)

-- zigdon

  • Comment on Re^2: Class::DBI cascading delete problem?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Class::DBI cascading delete problem?
by meredith (Friar) on Sep 27, 2004 at 16:33 UTC

    That must be something new that I haven't dealt with yet. I would stick to the explitit definitions, myself. Maybe you need to change the order, if the above-mentioned checks only happen at definition time, and not when you call the resulting accessor methods.

    mhoward - at - hattmoward.org