Conversation
We currently have a bug relating to matching table names with table java method names. This change is there to make it easier to understand what's going on.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Now that the methods in TableReflection have names that make it obvious what the input arguments represent, it is pretty obvious that the code in this file is incorrect.
I don’t have time to work on this until next week. Can you help make sure this is fixed and cut a new release tomorrow @andreahn? This is blocking opptak.
They have a table that has the same name as the schema. Because of this the Java field name for the table becomes "ORGANISASJON_" while the jOOQ name (database name) for the table is "ORGANISASJON". Talk to Eirik M for details.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In my opinion the name argument to the @table directive should be matched against the jOOQ table name and not the java table field name. Since this seems to be the first collision we should make sure our fix lands in that direction so that opptak uses @table(name: "ORGANISASJON").
| */ | ||
| public static Optional<String> searchTableForKeyMethodName(String tableName, String keyName) { | ||
| var keys = PATH_BY_TABLE_AND_KEY.get(tableName); | ||
| public static Optional<String> searchTableFieldNameForPathMethodNameGivenFkJavaFieldName(String tableJavaFieldName, String fkJavaFieldName) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Jeg vet ikke helt om jeg er så enig i at alle navnene her ble noe særlig forbedret, som f.eks. denne
|
Kanskje lukk denne? |
2 participants
We currently have a bug relating to matching table names with table java method names. This change is there to make it easier to understand what's going on.