[Dbix-class] DBIx::Class or Rose::DB::Object or other???

Brandon Black blblack at gmail.com
Wed Jun 7 00:59:42 CEST 2006

On 6/6/06, Guillermo Roditi <groditi at gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't understand the anti-loader thing. it saves me a lot of initial
> typing.... it's kind of nice. but i totally agree on the whole  dump load
> once and then mantain manually. A huge help when moving apps to DBIC.

The anti-loader thing is very much along the lines stated in RDBO's
Metadata docs about the issue.  DDL generated from an autoloaded
Schema is not neccesarily a 1:1 match with the DDL that generated the
database the autoloader is pointed at.  Also, there is a good deal of
metadata (especially about relationships) which is always in the
programmer's head rather than in the actual DDL that created the
database being autoloaded.  For these reasons, a manually created (or
at least manually tweaked) set of Schema classes are always superior.

> the
> auto loading of meta data into RDBO is what i really liked, column types,
> length constraints, etc.

In DBIC, the deeper level of per-column metadata (type information,
length constraint, nullability, etc) is always autoloaded if you
didn't supply it manually, even when not using an autoloader per se
(that little peice of autoloading is built into the core of

Thus DBIx::Class::Schema::Loader doesn't even bother with such issues,
and instead just lets the core columns_info_for support take care of
it.  It would probably be a good idea if I would (at least optionally)
make the Schema::Loader export this data when doing a one-shot dump,
as it doesn't bother with that today.

-- Brandon

More information about the Dbix-class mailing list