in reply to Rose::DB and DBIx

The best summary of the differences is here.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Rose::DB and DBIx
by siracusa (Friar) on Jan 19, 2007 at 17:16 UTC
    That summary is a bit out of date. Both RDBO and DBIC have improved a lot since then.
      After considering DBIx::Class, Rose::DB was recommended to me. One thing I can't figure out is why there is the requirement that tables have a primary key. I'm working with a legacy DB in which many tables do not have a primary key. Is Rose::DB simply unusable? Or is there a workaround I haven't found yet?

        In RDBO, each object represents a single, uniquely identified row in a table. Therefore, there must be some way to uniquely identify a row in a table. Any unique key will do, even if it's not specified as a primary key constraint in the database. But RDBO will need something that it calls a primary key. You can pick one of the unique keys and tell RDBO that it is the primary key, for example.

        (You can actually create RDBO-derived classes that front tables without unique or primary keys, but the load() and save() object methods will not work as designed, for what I hope are obvious reasons.)