Override Merge API in 3.x version
See original GitHub issuePreviously it was possible to override MySQL provider behaviour in case of calling merge API.
public override int Merge<T>(DataConnection connection,
Expression<Func<T, bool>> deleting, bool delete,
IEnumerable<T> source, string table, string database, string schema)
How to do it in 3.0? I need to implement workaround for MySQL, because lin2db fails on merge call (which used for bulk update opetation).
https://github.com/linq2db/linq2db/issues/1596 https://github.com/linq2db/linq2db/issues/1596
It is crucial for my existing code base to override it. Some fallback for example per-row processing.
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 3 years ago
- Comments:5 (3 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
github - Git merge with force overwrite
A merge conflict can occur within some file 1 when the base version differs from both the current (also called local, HEAD, or...
Read more >Merge requests API | GitLab
In the case of a merge request from the same project, source_project_id , target_project_id and project_id are the same. In the case of...
Read more >Manage manifest files | Android Studio
The manifest merger tool combines all XML elements from each file by following merge heuristics and obeying merge preferences that you have ...
Read more >Merge and override
Merge and override. Compose lets you define a Compose application model through multiple Compose files. When doing so, Compose follows the rules declared...
Read more >Force merge API | Elasticsearch Guide [8.9]
Use the force merge API to force a merge on the shards of one or more indices. Merging reduces the number of segments...
Read more >
Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start Free
Top Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Better create PR and share it with others 😉
Yes in case of full implementation it makes sense and I will share of course.
Though for the moment I want to repeat workaround of version 2.x first.