Hi Richard Koslik,
Do you really want to split the model to multiple rlinq files or you just want to organize the generated classes better? Please note that maintaining multiple rlinq is more difficult and you might not be able to define associations between the different parts of the model. Additionally, all rlinq files will have to be merged at some stage, so that the whole metadata is available to the runtime.
What you can do at the moment to organize the generated classes is to use separate namespaces for the different logical groups of classes and enable the Generate in nested namespaces
option from the model settings. This way the classes will be generated in separate project folders for each namespace. If your tables are already placed in different schemas, you could also enable the Use schema names as namespaces
option in the Add new item wizard, so that the classes are generated automatically in separate namespaces, based on the schema names.
I am asking these questions because we would like to know what is your motivation to use multiple rlinq files for the same model, perhaps the same could be achieved with one rlinq but with more customized code generation.
All the best,
the Telerik team
Q3’11 of Telerik OpenAccess ORM is available for download. Register for the What's New in Data Tools webinar to see what's new and get a chance to WIN A FREE LICENSE!