×
The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.
I agree that a cascaded delete can be scary. Normally I use the option to
stop you cold in your tracks (restrict). For example, if I delete an item
class should that delete all items using that item class (and all order
lines, etc using those items) or should it stop me and say "dude, you
can't delete that item class because it's in use". That's what restrict
versus a cascaded delete do. In that case, perhaps an alternate decision
may need to be made. That's what active record codes and triggers are
for. Don't allow any new items to be assigned an inactive item class.
Don't allow any existing items to have their item class be changed to an
inactive item class.
But if you want the delete to be one line of SQL, or one delete operation
in rpg, then you're going to have to cascade.
I don't think you could build this huge view that would join all
dependencies together and then
delete from myview where thiscolumn='deleteme'
and have that work. Can you delete from any view, let alone a view that
spans multiple tables?
Rob Berendt
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact
[javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.