Closed mamift closed 10 months ago
Hello @mamift,
I've been thinking for a while about your proposal, and I don't see in which cases it could be useful when designing the database.
In what cases would this functionality be useful?
Wouldn't it work to set the Persistent
property to false
in the field's properties to make it not exist in the database?
Regards
Ah I did not know about that, and that comes close, as changing Persistent
to false does get picked up by EF migrations, so I'll use that for now.
I have a library where clients are constantly changing (an in-production app) which columns are in use and which aren't; there are about 150+ in use columns, but about 500+ that aren't. So in total the column count is about ~650.
I realise I can't just leave them sitting there unused (in the database) as I'm getting awfully close to the 1024 column table limit in SQL Server, so I need to remove columns from the table to stay under that limit, and there's seemingly no end in sight as to all the extra columns they might want. They also change their minds about some columns, so ones they thought they didn't need, they realise they want them back.
This solves my issue. Thanks.
I have a model with a large entity with many properties (about 155+):
It would be good to have a feature that allows one to disable or enable an individual property such that: