Re: [xmlblaster-devel] ldbc

[Peter Bennett <bencom at bencom.co.nz>]

Greetings

I do beleive I have got it...

I need to rework the class file a bit to tidy stuff up.
And write up a requirement for it.

The answer is using decimal(19,0) hard coded in
for longint... All db's behave as expected.

Because ldbc provides the abstraction the mappings
in xmlBlaster are not really needed with the new
LdbcManagerCommonTable.class...

This class is virtually identical to JdbcManagerCommonTable
with modifications to sql syntax and code for delete cascading.

Once I have sorted it all I will run up the test suite on the
three db's I have... hsqldb, postgres and mysql.

I think this will most likely throw up some more sql syntax errors.

Michele: Sorry to confuse you... Dividing the uniqueId by 100 is just
one of those things you do when trying to get your head around
something... The intention was never to go about changing things
like that, just to try and get predictable results to diagnose and
bug track with.

Regards