BTW have more than one application accessing the same DB without an applicationServer or without using SOA is the right way to disasters (and you are a witness of that).
2008/9/26 Peter Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > haha.... I wish that was an option. integrating with an existing > product, which had no conventions, foriegn key constraints in the > database or consistency with data, makes it a "little bit" more > challenging. > > since no one likes the idea, I won't bother exploring it or try to > make a patch. > > On Sep 26, 6:16 pm, "Fabio Maulo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I know something about that problem... the solution was clean the DB and > > ensure it using triggers.. now nobody else can add dirty rows (but that > > system is not plugable). > > P.S. with that phrase DBAs are now happy... at the end the solution is in > > the RDBMS power ;) > > > > 2008/9/26 Peter Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > the situation is rather complex. The base table is fixed and won't > > > ever change. to make things more complicated, there may be custom > > > views for addresses which "extend" the address class by joining > > > another table. I say "extend" loosely, since it's erratic from > > > customer to customer. I didn't create the legacy system, but i do have > > > to integrate with it. > > > > > the only thing consistent is the discriminator column is used and has > > > either a string value, NULL, "NULL" string, empty string or space. I > > > won't bore anyone with the other ugliness of the legacy system. > > > > > In any case, it sounds like no one thinks adding the discriminator > > > column to the select statement is desirable. Even though I disagree, I > > > accept that's how people feel. > > > > > peter > > > > > On Sep 26, 4:57 pm, "Fabio Maulo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > If you are working on existing table that represent more than one > class > > > > state and you want work with NH as normal, NH must know it.NH must > know > > > how > > > > many classes you have in the table or... > > > > Use the <where> clause when you have only one class, then, when > somebody > > > add > > > > a "plug-in" change the mapping according. > > > > We are talking about "plug-in" like it was a simple class.... and it > is > > > > absolutely not if it is persistent. > > > > - The plug-in must have a mapping > > > > - Who write the plug-in must know what they are extending (mean the > base > > > > mapping of the base class) > > > > - Somebody must change the DB schema > > > > - Somebody must change the configuration to add mappings of the > plug-in > > > > - Somebody must restart the app to recreate the session factory > > > > > > 2008/9/26 Peter Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > -- > > > > Fabio Maulo > > > > -- > > Fabio Maulo > > > -- Fabio Maulo --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
