Fix missing Association/AssociationSet(aka FK constraints) in the EF manifest files

[kenjiuno]

This is updated PR from #100, targeting new 2.1.0 branch.

It adds missing relationships between entities, into the EntityFramework provider manifest.

New AssociationSets in ssdl (table to table?):

• PgTables ⇔ PgTableColumns
• PgTables ⇔ PgConstraints
• PgTableColumns ⇔ PgForeignKeyColumns
• PgConstraints ⇔ PgConstraintColumns
• PgConstraints ⇔ PgForeignKeyColumns
• PgViews ⇔ PgViewColumns
• PgViews ⇔ PgViewConstraints
• PgViewColumns ⇔ PgViewForeignKeyColumns
• PgViewConstraints ⇔ PgViewConstraintColumns
• PgViewConstraints ⇔ PgViewForignKeyColumns
• PgFunctions ⇔ PgFunctionParametetrs
• PgProcedures ⇔ PgProcedureParameters

New Associations in ssdl (column to column?):

• ViewColumn → ViewForeignKeyColumn
• View → ViewConstraint
• ViewColumn → ViewForeignKeyColumn
• ViewConstraint → ViewConstraintColumn
• ViewConstraint → ViewForeignKeyColumn
• Procedure → ProcedureParameter

I have figured current status to check missing ones.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/24560712/ef6/fixed_npgsql_msl_ssdl.png

Currently EdmGen fails to generate correct schema for target database, because associations are missing. e.g. Table has no TableColumns.

[franciscojunior]

Hi, Kenji!

Do you think those changes have any impact in the database creation support added by #91 ?

[kenjiuno]

Hi.

I think my changes to provider manifest won't affect #91.

I can test if #91 affect my changes. I'll check later, and report then.

[franciscojunior]

Hi.

I think my changes to provider manifest won't affect #91.

I can test if #91 affect my changes. I'll check later, and report then.

Thanks for having a look at this, Kenji!

[kenjiuno]

Hi.

I have added a test TestSchemaInformation to check the usability of EntityFramework provider manifest.

The SchemaInformation is to see reverse engineered objects from db, such as tables/constraints/functions/etc.

The test just checks object's existance generated by TestFixtureSetup.

[roji]

@franciscojunior and @kenjiuno, this PR is marked as open and scheduled for 2.2, are we waiting for anything on this? Or has it been superceded by #213?

[franciscojunior]

I also don't know if it has been superceded by #213.

[kenjiuno]

Hi.

This pr is not related with ddex working.

It fixes some missing relations.

As a result, tools like EdmGen can discover functions and stored procedures and so on.

[roji]

OK, thanks @kenjiuno! Do you still need work on this, is it waiting review, or can it be merged? Is it tested/safe enough for inclusion in 2.2?

[kenjiuno]

Hi.

I have no plan to improve this for now. It is completed. And it needs review. However I think anyone may not need it. So, no one can review it... I will wait for comments from someone.

EF6 and Npgsql will work well without this pr. So, please skip this pr in 2.2.

[kenjiuno]

I will close this pr for a moment.