Re: tck test status

[Craig Russell]

Hi Andy,

In the company package.jdo, some of the information you need is there

        <class name="Employee"
            identity-type="application"

...
        <class name="Project"
            identity-type="application"
            objectid-class="org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.company.Project$Oid">
            <field name="projid" primary-key="true"/>
            <field name="reviewers" persistence-modifier="persistent">

            </field>
...

In the company-derby.orm, the Project is mapped thus:

        <class name="Project" table="projects">
            <field name="projid" column="PROJID" primary-key="true"/>
            <field name="reviewers" table="project_reviewer">
                <join column="PROJID"/>
                <element column="REVIEWER"/>
            </field>

And the Employee:

        <class name="Employee">
         <field name="reviewedProjects" mapped-by="reviewers"/>







I do have an action item for Chapter 15 that should explain this better.

Thanks,

Craig


On May 24, 2005, at 2:25 PM, Andy Jefferson wrote:

<field name="reviewedProjects" persistence-modifier="persistent"> <collection element-type="org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.company.Project"/> <collection element-type="org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.company.Employee"/> From this mapping of reviewers, you know that the project_reviewer table contains a column referring to Project called PROJID, and a column referring to the Employee called REVIEWER. When you have a mapped-by attribute, you need to invert the mapping for the other side, so the join column on the Employee side is REVIEWER, and the reference to the other side is PROJID. From the types of both fields, reviewers and reviewed_by, you have the collection element types. I don't know what more information is needed in order to map this. Could you explain your algorithm and tell us where you arrive which needs more information?

Below is a summary four test errors that are responsible for 90 out of a total of 115 errors when running the tck on jpox/derby. The fourth one listed is a test cleanup problem logged as JIRA JDO-48. Could the JPOX

team please take a look at the others?

test(org.apache.jdo.tck.query.Cast)javax.jdo.JDOUserException: Field
"org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.company.Employee.reviewedProjects" has been
defined as "mapped-by" the field
"org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.company.Project.reviewers" yet this is of an

must be of type "org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.company.Employee"

incorrect type (java.util.Set). The field that is set as the "mapped-by"

Set object in the other class. Is this to represent a M-N or 1-N

interpretation, which is a bad thing.


defined in.

With 1-N :-
class A
{
    Set b;
}
class B
{
    A a;
}
You define the metadata for A field b to have a mapped-by as "a".


With a M-N :-
class A
{
    Set b;
}
class B
{
    Set b;
}

M-N you need a join. I see no <join> in the SVN metadata.

HTH
--
Andy
JPOX - Java Persistent Objects

Well you have a MetaData specification that has a "mapped-by" that points to a relationship ? I see nothing in the JDO 2 spec that defines the metadata for M-N relationships. Would be nice if the spec included a definition of what implementations are supposed to accept because without it, it is left open to JPOX requires that any mapped-by field is of the type of the class that it is With JPOX currently you don't use mapped-by, and you use <join/> because for a

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature