bi-directional o2m/m2o beats uni-directional o2m in SQL efficiency?

Posted by Henry on Stack Overflow See other posts from Stack Overflow or by Henry
Published on 2010-03-05T20:58:45Z Indexed on 2010/03/09 1:36 UTC
Read the original article Hit count: 332

Filed under:
|
|
|

Use these 2 persistent CFCs for example:

// Cat.cfc
component persistent="true" {
  property name="id" fieldtype="id" generator="native";
  property name="name";
}

// Owner.cfc
component persistent="true" {
  property name="id" fieldtype="id" generator="native";
  property name="cats" type="array" fieldtype="one-to-many" cfc="cat" cascade="all";
} 

When one-to-many (unidirectional) Note: inverse=true on unidirectional will yield undesired result:

insert into cat (name) values        (?)
insert into Owner default values
update cat set Owner_id=? where id=?

When one-to-many/many-to-one (bi-directional, inverse=true on Owner.cats):

insert into Owner default  values
insert into cat (name, ownerId) values (?, ?) 

Does that mean setting up bi-directional o2m/m2o relationship is preferred 'cause the SQL for inserting the entities is more efficient?

© Stack Overflow or respective owner

Related posts about coldfusion

Related posts about cf9