To review, I have three tables :

Show, InputFile and a join table, Show2InputFile.

Show happens to be a subclass of InventoryItem using JOINED inheritance strategy. Not sure if that matters. (I've seen some weird behavior w/ Hibernate w/ JOINED, so I'm suspicious of it for no rational reason)

Show has a PK "id", as does InputFile.

Show2InputFile looks like :

+-------------+------------------+------+-----+---------+-------+
| Field       | Type             | Null | Key | Default | Extra |
+-------------+------------------+------+-----+---------+-------+
| showId      | int(11) unsigned | NO   | PRI |         |       |
| inputFileId | int(11) unsigned | NO   | PRI |         |       |
+-------------+------------------+------+-----+---------+-------+

I believe it's unidirectional ManyToOne (if that's legal). Each InputFile is associated with one Show and one Show only, but multiple InputFiles can be associated to the same Show.

Currently I have in InputFile :

    @ManyToOne
    @JoinTable(name="Show2InputFile",
            joinColumns = @JoinColumn(name="inputFileId"),
            inverseJoinColumns = @JoinColumn(name="showId"))
    public Show getShow() {
        return show;
    }

and while Hibernate thinks that's just peachy, OpenJPA 1.0.0 gags on it with

Caused by: <openjpa-1.1.0-SNAPSHOT-r420667:588533 fatal user error> org.apache.openjpa.persistence.ArgumentException: You have supplied columns for "com.joost.model.logistics.InputFile.show<element:class java.lang.Object>", but this mapping cannot have columns in this context.

Now, while I don't want to add anything to the Show class, since this really is unidirectional, I did add :

    @OneToMany
    @JoinTable(name="Show2InputFile",
             inverseJoinColumns = @JoinColumn(name="inputFileId"),
              joinColumns = @JoinColumn(name="showId"))
    public Set<InputFile> getInputFiles(){
        return null;
    }

    public void setInputFiles(Set<InputFile> list) {
        //noop
    }

just to see if that would make OpenJPA happy, but as far as I can see, it doesn't. I believe I get the same error message.

I really want to switch to OpenJPA, but this is stopping me. Does anyone have any idea what I'm doing wrong?

geir


On Nov 5, 2007, at 3:05 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:

Where are the foreign keys?

Bear in mind that @OneToOne, @OneToMany, @ManyToMany, and @ManyToOne
are JPA annotations, not ER annotations. The concepts differ a bit.

-Patrick

On Nov 5, 2007 11:33 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On Nov 5, 2007, at 2:07 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:

What happens if you just use a @OneToOne instead of the @ManyToOne?

The problem is that it's not OneToOne

Can you describe this in more detail? (I.e., in terms of what your
schema looks like.)


Well, there's a Show table, w/ a pk, and the Show class really has no
interest in the InputFile class.

There's an inputfile table, w/ a pk.  The InputFile class does have a
ManyToOne with Show :

In real world problem, each Show we have on the platform is a
singleton ("I dream of Genie Epsode 11"), but a content owner may
give us updated source material - say they have a new transcoding.
We want to add a new InputFile into the database, point it at the
Show, but the Show itself doesn't care about it's source.

Does that help?

eir



-Patrick

On Nov 5, 2007 10:40 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On Nov 5, 2007, at 12:44 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:

I'm a newbie, so I don't quite grok the question.  Show itself
doesn't have any references to InputFile.

Aha! IIRC, @ManyToOne is only meaningful when used as the back
side of
a @OneToMany.

We don't have that.  There are reasons, and its intentional.


What happens if you just use a @OneToOne instead of the @ManyToOne?

The problem is that it's not OneToOne



-Patrick

On Nov 5, 2007 9:16 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On Nov 5, 2007, at 11:48 AM, Patrick Linskey wrote:

Hi,

What does the other side of the relation look like?

I'm a newbie, so I don't quite grok the question.  Show itself
doesn't have any references to InputFile.

Also, what does
the Show class look like?

in what way?  Show is a subclass in a JOINED inheritance
strategy, if
that makes any difference.

geir




-Patrick

On Nov 5, 2007 8:08 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm a newbie, so forgive me if I'm not asking the question the
right
way.

I have a join table in my DB :

+-------------+------------------+------+-----+--------- +-------+ | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra | +-------------+------------------+------+-----+--------- +-------+ | showId | int(11) unsigned | NO | PRI | | | | inputFileId | int(11) unsigned | NO | PRI | | | +-------------+------------------+------+-----+--------- +-------+

where showId and inputFileID are PKs in the show table and
inputfile
table.

In my code for the InputFile class :

     @ManyToOne
     @JoinTable(name="Show2InputFile",
             joinColumns = @JoinColumn(name="inputFileId"),
             inverseJoinColumns = @JoinColumn(name="showId"))
     public Show getShow() {
         return show;
     }

When JPA is instrumenting my classes, it complains :

Caused by: <openjpa-1.1.0-SNAPSHOT-r420667:588533 fatal user
error>
org.apache.openjpa.persistence.ArgumentException: You have
supplied
columns for
"com.joost.model.logistics.InputFile.show<element:class
java.lang.Object>", but this mapping cannot have columns in this
context.


I don't quite understand the error.  I use this same thing
elsewhere
(I think) w/o a problem.  Can someone give me a hint?

geir







--
Patrick Linskey
202 669 5907





--
Patrick Linskey
202 669 5907





--
Patrick Linskey
202 669 5907





--
Patrick Linskey
202 669 5907

Reply via email to