Add a direct relationship between FacilityCycle and Investigation

[tomhayter]

In ISIS we currently have some investigations that fall outside of FacilityCycle dates. These gaps in between cycles can last up to a few months. All investigations belong to a cycle, but it is difficult to calculate which FacilityCycle an Investigation belongs to based on it's date. This causes issues when users try to access these investigations in topcat/datagateway.

Adding a direct many-to-one relationship between Investigation and FacilityCycle would help us solve this problem. My proposal is to add a facilityCycle field to the Investigation table. This means that even if the dates don't always match up, an Investigation can still belong to a FacilityCycle.

[RKrahl]

Note that this relation did exist in ICAT 4.2.5. It has been removed in 4.3.0. I don't remember the reason.

I'm indifferent to adding it again. In any case, it should be optional, as there are facilities (HZB) that do not use FacilityCycle at all.

[tomhayter]

After a little more investigation it looks like it would make more sense at ISIS if Investigations belonged to multiple cycles, as some of our investigations run over multiple years. Therefore, I'd like to suggest we make the direct relationship between Investigation and FacilityCycle a many-to-many relationship by adding an InvestigationFacilityCycle join table.

[agbeltran]

Included in 5.0.0