I'm mapping a new RoR application onto an existing Oracle schema. The tables *usually* have a primary key named *id*, but the sequences that assign new id values don't have Rails-convention names. Is there a way to tell Rails that the sequence for table FOO is not FOO_SEQ, but XYZ_SEQ?
If that's not possible, is there a way to create the equivalent of a table's *view*, but for a sequence?
Looking forward to any suggestions. Thanks.
I got an answer from Railsfrance: set_sequence_name(value = nil, &block) can be used. I hadn't been able to find the word "sequence" in the index of the AWDwR2 book...
i think you want to Google for "legacy app" or "legacy schema" There's quite a few blogs and threads here.
Yes, I did search the site for these keywords and other combinations. I couldn't find an answer to my follow-up question:
The legacy Oracle schema uses triggers to get the sequences' next values. Isn't there a potential conflict with Rails' mechanism during record creation?
If so, should I tell Rails to use the existing trigger mechanism (and how), or should I deactivate the triggers exclusively for my application - the tables are being accessed by other legacy apps - (and how)?
Last thought : I'm going to create views, so that I can use the Rails naming conventions. Maybe that solves my problem, assuming I can link the sequence to the view?
You can tell I'm new both to RoR and Oracle, can't you...
Thanks, Chris.
Le mécanisme d'affectation des clés primaires n'est pas clair, dans le contexte de ma base existante : celle-ci utilise des "triggers" pour récupérer la nouvelle valeur dans la séquence. Comment éviter un conflit entre ceux-ci et Rails, lors de la création d'un nouvel enregistrement ? Dois-je dire à Rails d'utiliser le mécanisme existant (via "triggers") et comment ? Ou alors, dois-je inactiver les "triggers" pour mon application (sachant que d'autres applis ont accès à la même base) et comment ?
RoR et Oracle sont nouveaux pour moi ; ça se voit, non ?