I have the cascade set to all-delete-orphan, maybe it should be
all,delete-orphan that you have written or is it just an spelling
error? :)
I have tried to have an many-to-one relation on the InvoiceEntry but
with no success, but I may have done an mistake, but am I really
forced to have an relation on the child?

On Aug 12, 8:50 pm, Jason Dentler <[email protected]> wrote:
> I am a bit confused about your question, but I'll answer the question I
> think you asked
>
> You seem to be confusing inverse with cascade. The two are separate, almost
> entirely unrelated concepts. I will assume you are talking about a
> bidirectional one-to-many relationship where the many side is a set.
>
> You have
>
> public class Invoice
> {
>    protected virtual ISet<InvoiceItem> Items { get; set; }
>    public virtual bool AddItem(Invoiceitem newItem)
>    public virtual bool RemoveItem(InvoiceItem itemToRemove)
>
> }
>
> public class InvoiceItem
> {
>    public virtual Invoice Invoice { get; protected set; }
>
> }
>
> When mapping invoice's items collection, use cascade="all" (or better yet,
> "all,delete-orphan") and inverse="true".
>
> Since the database only represents the one-to-many with the
> [InvoiceItem].[InvoiceId] field, and the model represents each "side" of the
> one-to-many with a reference, NHibernate will ignore one side.
> inverse="true" means to look at invoiceItem.Invoice to fill
> [InvoiceItem].[InvoiceId]. You should still keep both sides "in sync" in
> your model. Don't be sloppy.
>
> Cascade means when NHibernate flush (insert/update/delete) the invoice, it
> will automatically include each child invoice item.
>
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 11:07 AM, Niclas Pehrsson <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > My dream scenario in code is to be able to do the following code.
>
> > var invoice = new Invoice();
> > invoice.AddEntry(new InvoiceEntry("Title", unitPrice, quantity);
> > session.Save(invoice);
>
> > And then all the invoice entries will be saved with the invoice.
>
> > As I have read and tried that isn't the most efficient way to do it
> > because then I will be forced to use inverse="false" cause if it would
> > be true the entries would not be associated with the invoice.
> > And if I use inverse="false" I will get some unnecessary Update
> > queries.
>
> > Can NHibernate in any way do so I can do as my code example above and
> > just take the Id (Guid) generated for the invoice and take with it in
> > the insert queries for the entries?
>
> > --
> > 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]<nhusers%[email protected]>
> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en.

-- 
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