Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of Ticket #24289


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Feb 6, 2015, 3:03:29 AM (10 years ago)
Author:
Anssi Kääriäinen
Comment:

It seems I did the mixup based on the first sentence of Django's docs (which I guess is technically correct, you use ForeignKey to add the automatically created many-to-one relation), and table 3 of IBM's docs, the first line in there seems to be many-to-one, although the meaning of the header is that the relationships are many-to-one, but the direction the terms appear in the table can actually be one-to-many (nice!).

I'll mark this as invalid. I still do think the terms are confusing.

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified

  • Ticket #24289

    • Property Resolution → invalid
    • Property Status new → closed
    • Property Summary ForeignKey is many_to_one, not one_to_many → Is usage of many_to_one and one_to_many terms confusing for relation flags?

  • Ticket #24289 – Description

    initial v1  
     1EDIT: we haven't mixed the terms up, I did that myself. The docs might need an update though.
     2
    13It seems we have mixed up the naming of many_to_one and one_to_many. For example these references point out that ForeignKey is many_to_one: http://www-01.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSEPGG_8.2.0/com.ibm.db2.udb.doc/admin/c0004733.htm, https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.7/topics/db/examples/many_to_one/.
    24
Back to Top