In the context of a long transaction, what is the correct way to persist an
object with a collection of children obtained from a join table?
Say, for example, I have these three tables:
STUDENT
-------
STUDENT_ID INTEGER PK
COURSE
------
COURSE_ID INTEGER PK
STUDENT_COURSE
--------------
STUDENT_ID INTEGER FK
COURSE_ID INTEGER FK
And two java objects named Student and Course, where Student has a
java.util.List collection of Course objects, which are mapped as:
<class name="Student" identity="id">
<map-to table="STUDENT"/>
<field name="id" type="integer">
<sql name="STUDENT_ID" type="integer">
</field>
<field name="courses" type="Course" collection="collection">
<sql name="COURSE_ID" many-table="STUDENT_COURSE"
many-key="STUDENT_ID"/>
</field>
</class>
<class name="Course" identity="id">
<map-to table="COURSE"/>
<field name="id" type="integer">
<sql name="COURSE_ID" type="integer"/>
</field>
</class>
Then in the first transaction, a student is retrieved and sent to the UI.
The UI adds a new Course to the student object and requests the object be
saved. Should the second transaction just have to db.update the Student
instance?
********************************************
Steve Ebersole
IT Integration Engineer
Vignette Corporation
512.741.4195
Visit http://www.vignette.com
********************************************
-----------------------------------------------------------
If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of:
unsubscribe castor-dev
