I would like to point that above mapping pattern works, but only when the second mapping (of class BusinessObject) was added to NH configuration BEFORE the first one mapping (of ConcreteObject1 and ConcreteObject2).
On 20 Lut, 17:13, Piotr Jakóbczyk <[email protected]> wrote: > I can't send actual classes and tables, but let's try simple example: > > abstract class BusinessObject > { > > } > > class ConcreteObject1 : BusinessObject > { > > } > > class ConcreteObject2 : BusinessObject > { > > } > > Additionaly thera are many ohter classes inherited from > ConcreteObject1 as well as ConcretObject2. Except of base class - > BusinessObject - both of concrete class have different specific > characters. > For some reason objects of both concrete classes MUST be stored in > distinct tables: TABLE1, TABLE2. > > Sa we have following mappings: > > <class name="ConcreteObject1" table="TABLE1" polymorphism="explicite" > > <subclass> > </subclass> > <subclass> > </subclass> > </class> > > <class name="ConcreteObject2" table="TABLE2" polymorphism="explicite" > > <subclass> > </subclass> > <subclass> > </subclass> > </class> > > Mapping strategy of subclasses is not importat at this moment. > Important fact is that mapping strategy for subclasses of > ConcreteObject1 can be different from mappng strategy for subclasses > of ConcreteObject2. > > But in some cases we need to query about list of BusinessObject's > (ConcreteObject1 and ConcreteObject2 together) base properties. So we > introduced some special marker classes: > > class ConcreteObject1Marker : BusinessObject > { > > } > > class ConcreteObject2Marker : BusinessObject > { > > } > > There are no classes inherited from ConcreteObject1Marker or > ConcreteObject2Marker. > > And we want to prepare following mapping of BusinessObject class: > > <class name="BusinessObject" abstract="true" mutable="false" > polymorphism="explicite" > > <union-subclass name="ConcreteObject1Marker" table="TABLE1"> > </union-subclass> > <union-subclass name="ConcreteObject2Marker" table="TABLE2"> > </union-subclass> > </class> > > And now we should can quering about BusinessObject's instances > although they are stored in distinct tables (TABLE1 and TABLE2). > > -- > Piotr Jakóbczyk -- Piotr Jakóbczyk --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
