You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
At present if you try delete a DMClass in Firestarter and it has DMProps and DMRelationships then although DMClass tries to cascade delete DMRelationships and DMRelationship tries to cascade delete DMRelationshipProps and DMClass tries to cascade delete DMPRops you land up getting an error message that cannot delete these.
I have written a DMClassDeleter in firestarter to overcome this but seems like there should be a fix in Habanero.
Updated by Peter Wiles about 3 years ago
Thinking about this: would this impact on performance when marking a bunch of objects for delete? Could we maybe have a boolean on the MarkForDelete method (an overload) to specify whether to perform this check when calling the method? It might load up a whole tree of objects. I understand this is necessary when actually persisting, but devs will expect the MarkForDelete to be cheap since it's just marking the object for deletion.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Redmine Bug #424
At present if you try delete a DMClass in Firestarter and it has DMProps and DMRelationships then although DMClass tries to cascade delete DMRelationships and DMRelationship tries to cascade delete DMRelationshipProps and DMClass tries to cascade delete DMPRops you land up getting an error message that cannot delete these.
I have written a DMClassDeleter in firestarter to overcome this but seems like there should be a fix in Habanero.
Updated by Peter Wiles about 3 years ago
Thinking about this: would this impact on performance when marking a bunch of objects for delete? Could we maybe have a boolean on the MarkForDelete method (an overload) to specify whether to perform this check when calling the method? It might load up a whole tree of objects. I understand this is necessary when actually persisting, but devs will expect the MarkForDelete to be cheap since it's just marking the object for deletion.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: