Hi Sanjay, reasons are probably simplicity of code and that it's easy to circumvent when you start with your own fresh database.
Django is more targeted to this case, not for legacy systems. Having said this, I use Django for a really ugly old existing database, and it works. There are not so many composite keys, and I work around it by using direct sql (encapsulated in functions/methods). This works fine for the common case of association classes, but your case is different. You can't just add a simple id when other applications access the database, too. Hmm. I personally don't find natural keys particularly cool, the tend to create a hassle when you have a lot of them. A few weeks ago, I asked for assistance to put composite keys to work, but the general advice was to refrain from it. I find it really sad that legacy systems don't get more attention, be it from Django or TurboGears or whatelse. The only object mapper that looks fine for legacy systems (and python) seems to be SQLAlchemy. Its approach also seems to be able to cope better with strangely twisted databases (you could also call it bad design). Well ... that's all I can give you for information. Michael --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
