well I think that for the sake of versioning, you should soft-delete the
cascaded lines also (and have the DBA'd trigger populate the history table
using the linked orderlines or whatever). that's for history data etc.
so, a whole aggregate should either be versionable or not

On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 11:36 AM, Patrick De Boeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

>
> 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?
> >
>


-- 
Ken Egozi.
http://www.kenegozi.com/blog
http://www.musicglue.com
http://www.castleproject.org
http://www.gotfriends.co.il

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to