Is it possible to know during the update or save listener that attached object it belongs to and then check if it is Versionable (thus stopping it here from re-inserting)
On 10 sep, 23:41, Patrick De Boeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > yep. Can't find any refernce on this. > > I was thinking about a generic way of removing all objects from my > versionable object and thus avoiding problems but I cannot find a > clean way to achieve that at the moment! > > On 10 sep, 22:54, "Will Shaver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > So you only want some of your entities to be marked as deleted and you want > > other entities to actually delete? > > > On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Patrick De Boeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > > I have seen that example, but if I take that case as an example then > > > my order would be softdeletable, but the orderline would not! > > > > Thus when I remove my order that will be set to "IsDeleted = true", > > > while my orderlines would actually be deleted immediately! > > > > This leads to resaving a deleted orderline ! > > > > On 10 sep, 18:37, "Will Shaver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >http://blogs.hibernatingrhinos.com/nhibernate/archive/2008/04/08/soft... > > > > > There is also some code in the NHibernate Contrib project under > > > > NHibernate.Burrow.Appblock.SoftDelete that you can review or use. > > > > > -Will > > > > > On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 4:06 AM, Patrick De Boeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >wrote: > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > I have the following situation: A domain model which has various > > > > > classes that all map to one or more tables in a DB2 database. For > > > > > keeping track of versioning our dba guys have written a trigger that > > > > > will copy the entire table record into a seperate 'history' version > > > > > table. > > > > > > No worries untill they figured out that with this approach it would be > > > > > impossible to track who actually deleted an item. So they went a step > > > > > further and made deletes forbidden. Now we would have to update the > > > > > record and set the a field to '+DELETE+'. A trigger will then run > > > > > afterwards and copy the 'deleted' version to the history and then > > > > > fysically delete the row. > > > > > > So far the intro. I have made an interface IVersionable (because not > > > > > all domain objects require this approach) and have written a > > > > > IVersionableDeleteEventListener that will do the following: > > > > > > if (entity is IVersionable) > > > > > { > > > > > IVersionable versionable = (IVersionable)entity; > > > > > versionable.CreatedBy = "+DELETE+"; > > > > > versionable.LastModification = DateTime.Now; > > > > > versionable.LastModifiedBy = > > > > > UserContextHelper.GetUserPrincipal(); > > > > > > CascadeBeforeDelete(session, persister, entity, entityEntry, > > > > > transientEntities); > > > > > CascadeAfterDelete(session, persister, entity, > > > > > transientEntities); > > > > > } > > > > > else > > > > > { > > > > > base.DeleteEntity(session, entity, entityEntry, > > > > > isCascadeDeleteEnabled, > > > > > persister, transientEntities); > > > > > } > > > > > > This now conflicts with my cascading rules I have set for this > > > > > object. I receive the following error: "deleted object would be re- > > > > > saved by cascade" > > > > > > The problem lies in the fact that A has a collection of B. A is > > > > > Versionable while B is not. Thus B should be deleted and A should be > > > > > marked for deletion. The cascading options set on A try the re-save B > > > > > which results in the above error. > > > > > > Does anyone have had the same problem and how have you then solved > > > > > this? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nhusers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
