Add a test case for join columns on the inverse side of a 1:1 assoc #11300
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
It was definitely not intentional, I should be able to look into it soon, do feel free to beat me to it though. |
|
Apparently I genuinely thought that was invalid: #10667 |
|
🤔 this originated in #10654 |
|
cc @mpdude |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
See #11299 for the same test on the 2.18.x branch.
In a project, I've stumbled across a "feature" which we seemed to have removed, but I don't know if it was on purpose. The entity model contained a bidirectional
OneToOnerelation with aJoinColumndeclared on the inverse side. That join column was actually added to the schema by the ORM and it was even possible to have it persist the ID of the foreign record.In 3.0, this is not possible anymore, but it's mainly prevented by the metadata model.
I'm opening this issue to clarify if we have removed this feature on purpose or if we have simply forgotten it while developing the new metadata mapping classes.
cc @greg0ire