> From: A mailing list for Enterprise JavaBeans development
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Alvaro Mota
> The deploytool make 3 tables for this relationship. CustomerBeanTable;
> AdressesBeanTable;CustomerAddress;
> But, i don�t hoping, I would like that it generate 2 tables, and
> AdressesBeanTable with one FK to CustomerBeanTable;
This is implementation dependent, the EJB 2.0 specification doesn't mention
anything about how relationships should be implemented.
The above method is interesting if you have existing tables that you are
trying to map to EJB 2.0 entities (and modifying the schemas is not an
option). It is not intrusive but carries a non-negligible overhead.
If you are starting from scratch and you can design your own schema, then
the solution you are looking for is more optimal (less joins, less tables)
at the cost of adding columns for your foreign keys.
To answer your question: you will have to either convince the J2EE RI
developers to implement the second approach or switch to an EJB container
that supports it.
--
Cedric
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
