no it shouldn't.
What you are changing is not some value of the "middle" object but the state
of a mutable object (the "right" side).
example:
- A has a one-to-one with B
- A is NOT mutable
- B is mutable

When you change a property value in B what is changed ? only B and NH must
track it.

2009/11/17 Eduardo Scoz <[email protected]>

> Yeah, I can see that's the reason for the object to be saved.
>
> My point, though is:  shouldn't the fact that the middle object is
> immutable prevent the last object from getting saved when using a
> one-to-one? This seems to be the behavior with sets that belong to the
> middle object.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> You have answered your question by yourself.
>>
>>
>> 2009/11/17 Eduardo Scoz <[email protected]>
>>
>>> Sorry, the only mutable object in my example is the "middle" one, User.
>>> The right-side one (UserPreferences) is mutable as it needs to be updated
>>> from a different part of the system.
>>>
>>> Thanks Fabio.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>
>>>> and those object are mutable or not ? (I mean the "right" side of the
>>>> one-to-one)
>>>>
>>>> 2009/11/17 Eduardo Scoz <[email protected]>
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure if this is a bug or a feature, so I thought it would be
>>>>> worthy to post here.
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems that during a save operation on a tree that contains immutable
>>>>> objects, even though those objects are not updated (correct behavior),
>>>>> objects that have a one-to-one relationship to those ones get updated.
>>>>>
>>>>> For example:
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a object UserData, with a many-to-one to User with a one-to-one
>>>>> UserPreferences.
>>>>> User in this case is immutable and kept in read-only cache.
>>>>> When I do a save on the UserData object, that object gets saved, and so
>>>>> does UserPreferences.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is that the correct behavior? I would expect only UserData to be saved.
>>>>> Sets that are part of User are not updated.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks guys,
>>>>>
>>>>> Eduardo Scoz
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Fabio Maulo
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Fabio Maulo
>>
>
>


-- 
Fabio Maulo

Reply via email to