On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 at 22:01, Lukas Eder <[email protected]> wrote:
Do also check for unique constraints on the foreign key. > Good thought, thanks. > As with any heuristics: Good luck! :) > Thanks :-) For now, I just have to refrain from causing a 1:N where it might not be, so it should be sufficient. * is it correct to be using fk.key.fields and fk.inverseKey.fields the way >> I am? >> > > Why wouldn't it be? > Partly because with Kotlin, IDEA doesn't really surface the most likely methods/properties to the top of the auto-complete list (I'm not sure why). I was initially looking for language like 'child' and 'parent' but all the methods with those names took a parameter I didn't know how to supply. (Maybe those methods are useful to my cause, but I'm not sure how). Even now, it isn't immediately intuitive that inverseKey.table is the 'child' table. But it seems I got that right. * does JOOQ have a fancier type of join where I don't really need to >> enumerate the fields in the on() anyway? (Assuming there is only 1 FK >> between the tables) >> > > onKey(ForeignKey) would probably help? > Yes! Just the thing! Thanks, David. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jOOQ User Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jooq-user/CAE14wDUe7D%3Dgzh3HK939AVkTnyDkqmNDiLUCGY8jW0xRAh4EuA%40mail.gmail.com.
