Yes, but what about it? Assuming that you have the correct mapping, the
appropriate behavior will happen

On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 11:50 PM, Tuna Toksöz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I see Peter's point, an assembly which may be closed and another assembly
> which may add subclasses, isn't this a possible thing?
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 11:44 PM, Jon Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>>
>> There are two things going on in your scenario
>>
>> 1. Returning the correct type of mapped object
>> 2. Filtering the rows due to legacy data.
>>
>>
>> Returning the correct type of mapped object
>> In The case that there is only one class NHibernate assumes every row in
>> the table is of that class. It has no need to add the address_type_code
>> to the select because it's going to build Addresses regardless of the
>> value. It would be very strange (and I suspect broken) to expect
>> Nhibernate to query for the rows and then only hydrate into Addresses
>> those entries that matched the discriminator. In that situation the row
>> Count of the sql query would could be different than the count of actual
>> objects returned after hydration. Yuck.
>>
>> As soon as you add a subclass NHibernate will add the address_type_code
>> column so that it can chose which class to create. I suspect that its
>> entirely right it only does this when it needs to.
>>
>>
>> Filtering the rows due to legacy data
>> To remove you data that doesn't match address_type_code = home_address
>> you should expect something to appear in the where clause. The
>> alternative, that you query for everything and then cut down the results
>> set during hydration rather than in the sql query, is likely to be ugly
>> and perform extremely badly depending on the distribution of non
>> home_address address rows.
>>
>> As I described in an earlier email, it's entirely right, indeed
>> preferable, that NHibernate does not add the where clause when you query
>> for the base class (as is always the case if there is only one class).
>>
>> Jon
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of Peter Lin
>> Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 12:37 PM
>> To: nhusers
>> Subject: [nhusers] Re: Discriminator bug
>>
>>
>>
>> sorry for the confusing explanations. I'll attempt to explain it
>> better.
>>
>> Here is the situation.
>>
>> I. I have a table in a legacy database which has existing records
>> which use the concept of a discriminator. In other words, there is a
>> type_code column, which has different values.
>>
>>
>> II. I have a C# object which represents an entity. The entity maps to
>> records in the table with a specific discriminator value.
>>
>>
>> III. I only want to get the records with a specific discriminator
>> value from the table like "home_address".
>>
>>
>> IV. I have a modeling tool which generates C# classes with the
>> appropriate NH attributes. Changing the code gen for the special case
>> to use one of the work arounds feels like a hack to me.
>>
>> V. since polymorphic queries require the discriminator column to
>> create the correct object instance, shouldn't it always include it in
>> the select part of the sql statement?
>>
>> thanks for taking time to listen and respond.
>>
>> peter
>>
>> On Sep 26, 3:20 pm, "Jon Palmer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > If you have only one class mapped then the only thing it can return is
>> > that one class so why would it need the address_type_code column?
>> >
>> > One of your previous emails indicated the problem was returning all
>> rows
>> > from the table. I'm confused about what the problem is your tryign to
>> > solve.
>> >
>> > Jon
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Tuna Toksöz
>
> Typos included to enhance the readers attention!
>
> >
>

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