To be honest, I'm not so much familiar with the internal structure of NHibernate and NHibernate.Envers, but may be we we are talking past each other :-(
What I do specify, is the definition of the entities (via fluent) and some "magic" inside NHibernate (or included tools) does create the data base schema automatically (we use SchemaExport). This works fine since years. To create and add the audit tables, I do nothing else as include Envers and call the Audit()-function for specific entities.I understand, envers does not create any db statements directly, but somewhere inside there must be knowledge about which "audit-structure" is necessary to audit the entities, I have specified. This is done automatically and does well for all entities based on a simple entity object. But for entities, mapped from a Dictionary collection, i still have the problems, described above with the audit table :-( Am Freitag, 9. Oktober 2015 15:38:56 UTC+2 schrieb Roger: > > << But for the moment, I still have the problem to find a place, where I > am able to hook my workaround into NHibernate/Envers. I know, envers use > the infrastructure of NHibernate to create the table on the database, but > there must be a place where envers creates automatically a kind of schema > definition for the audit table (depending of the configuration and the > entity definition to audit, right?). If you have some tipps for me, where > this is implemented (or better: how to hook in into this behavior), would > be very nice...>> > > > > No, envers doesn’t create any db schema implicitly. Nor does NHibernate. > There is some explicit code written by you (or some 3rd party lib) to > generate the schema, most probably you use SchemaExport somewhere. > SchemaExport uses NH’s configuration object’s mapping to create the db > schema. > > Right after that code has been run, you can of course modify the schema > whatever way you like. > > > > If you want explicit schema changes added to what’s normally produced by > SchemaExport, you can use <database-object> in your mapping. > > > > /Roger > > > > *From:* [email protected] <javascript:> [mailto: > [email protected] <javascript:>] *On Behalf Of *Matthias Kientz > *Sent:* den 9 oktober 2015 11:08 > *To:* nhusers <[email protected] <javascript:>> > *Subject:* Re: [nhusers] Envers: erroneous primary key for mapped > collection > > > > Hi Roger, > > I had tested the workaround just to eliminate the value column from the > audit table primary key, but this leads to primary key constrain exception > when a collection entry is modified. > The reason for this is, that envers will add an entry with REVTYPE = del > for the old value (but with the new REV number), when i modify a collection > entry. > And afterwards envers will add another entry to the audit table with > REVTYPE = add. > > So, instead of just removing the value column from the audit table primary > key, I also added the REVTYPE to the primary key. > This works for all of my use cases. > > For me, it looks like, the problem with the deleted entries (described > above) was solved in envers by adding the value column to the PK, but > adding REVTYPE would do the same and is less problematically due to > database type restrictions. From my point of view, it would be an > improvement for envers, to do the same. > > But for the moment, I still have the problem to find a place, where I am > able to hook my workaround into NHibernate/Envers. I know, envers use the > infrastructure of NHibernate to create the table on the database, but there > must be a place where envers creates automatically a kind of schema > definition for the audit table (depending of the configuration and the > entity definition to audit, right?). If you have some tipps for me, where > this is implemented (or better: how to hook in into this behavior), would > be very nice... > Thanks a lot ;-) > > > > Here is an example, what is happening on the database (I've trunkated all > other rows, which are not involved): > > > After initial create: > > table: HardwareSetting > HardwareSetting_id | SettingValue | SettingName > > *********************************************************************************** > 2c98afee-4c34-4d44-b515-a52c00ac6eed | 500 | SettingKey1 > > table: HardwareSetting_AUD > REV | HardwareSetting_id | SettingValue | SettingName | > REVTYPE > > *********************************************************************************** > 7 | 2c98afee-4c34-4d44-b515-a52c00ac6eed | 500 | SettingKey1 | 0 > > > > > After update the value of SettingKey1 from 500 to 600: > > table: HardwareSetting > HardwareSetting_id | SettingValue | SettingName > > *********************************************************************************** > 2c98afee-4c34-4d44-b515-a52c00ac6eed | 600 | SettingKey1 > > table: HardwareSetting_AUD > REV | HardwareSetting_id | SettingValue | SettingName | > REVTYPE > > *********************************************************************************** > 7 | 2c98afee-4c34-4d44-b515-a52c00ac6eed | 500 | SettingKey1 | 0 > 8 | 2c98afee-4c34-4d44-b515-a52c00ac6eed | 500 | SettingKey1 | 2 > 8 | 2c98afee-4c34-4d44-b515-a52c00ac6eed | 600 | SettingKey1 | 0 > > > > After delete SettingKey1 from collection: > > table: HardwareSetting > HardwareSetting_id | SettingValue | SettingName > > *********************************************************************************** > > > table: HardwareSetting_AUD > REV | HardwareSetting_id | SettingValue | SettingName | > REVTYPE > > *********************************************************************************** > 7 | 2c98afee-4c34-4d44-b515-a52c00ac6eed | 500 | SettingKey1 | 0 > 8 | 2c98afee-4c34-4d44-b515-a52c00ac6eed | 500 | SettingKey1 | 2 > 8 | 2c98afee-4c34-4d44-b515-a52c00ac6eed | 600 | SettingKey1 | 0 > 9 | 2c98afee-4c34-4d44-b515-a52c00ac6eed | 600 | SettingKey1 | 2 > > > > Am Donnerstag, 8. Oktober 2015 18:04:16 UTC+2 schrieb Roger: > > With the mapping you have, the ”SettingValue” is supposed to be part in > the audited table’s primary key. Or rather – part of the generated audited > composite-id mapping for ”HardwareSettings”. > > > > << Has someone an idea where to hook in to change the way Envers creates > the schema for the audit tables?> > > > > Envers doesn't create any schema for you. I guess you use NH Core's > schemaexport to generate the schema for you? That tool will generate schema > for your NH configuration object (which also contains mapping for envers > audited entities). > > I understand this will lead to problem if this pk contains a > “StringClobUserType” mapping. If you manually drop/change your pk after it > has been generated by “X” (=schemaexport), will things work as expected for > you then? > > > > > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On > Behalf Of *Matthias Kientz > *Sent:* den 8 oktober 2015 15:56 > *To:* nhusers <[email protected]> > *Subject:* [nhusers] Envers: erroneous primary key for mapped collection > > > > I use NHibernate with Fluent and Envers. > I have an auditable class Hardware, which contains the property Settings, > which is mapped to a collection entity. > > Error: > The created audit table adds also the value column (SettingValue) to the > primary key, which fails in this case (SqlCeException: Long value data type > cannot be indexed.) > > Expected: > The value column SettingValue should not be part of the primary key. > > > */* definition of Setting (in class Hardware) */* > public virtual IDictionary<string, string> Settings > { > get { return _settings; } > set { _settings = value; } > } > > */* automapping override with fluent */* > mapping.HasMany(x => x.Settings) > .Not.LazyLoad() > .AsMap<string>("SettingName") > .KeyColumns.Add("HardwareSettings_id") > .Table("HardwareSettings") > .Element("SettingValue", x => x.Type<StringClobUserType>()); > > */* trace of the resulting Hardware mapping (containing map > HardwareSettings) */* > <hibernate-mapping xmlns="urn:nhibernate-mapping-2.2"> > <class xmlns="urn:nhibernate-mapping-2.2" > name="MyApp.Data.Model.Hardware.Hardware, MyApp.Data.Model, > Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=866d4a0fa0599fe0" > table="`Hardware`"> > <cache usage="read-write" /> > <id name="Id" type="System.Guid, mscorlib, Version=4.0.0.0, > Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"> > <column name="Id" /> > <generator class="guid.comb" /> > </id> > <map cascade="save-update" lazy="false" name="Settings" > table="HardwareSettings"> > <cache usage="read-write" /> > <key> > <column name="HardwareSettings_id" /> > </key> > <index type="System.String, mscorlib, Version=4.0.0.0, > Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"> > <column name="SettingName" /> > </index> > <element > type="MyApp.DataAccess.NHibernate.UserTypes.StringClobUserType, > MyApp.DataAccess.NHibernate, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, > PublicKeyToken=866d4a0fa0599fe0"> > <column name="SettingValue" /> > </element> > </map> > > <!-- several other properties and subclasses --> > > </class> > </hibernate-mapping> > > */* trace of the resulting HardwareSettings autition table mapping */* > <hibernate-mapping assembly="NHibernate.Envers" auto-import="false" > xmlns="urn:nhibernate-mapping-2.2"> > <class entity-name="HardwareSettings_AUD" table="HardwareSettings_AUD"> > <composite-id name="originalId"> > <key-many-to-one class="NHibernate.Envers.DefaultRevisionEntity, > NHibernate.Envers, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, > PublicKeyToken=e2c5b946037fb7f8" name="REV"> > <column name="REV" /> > </key-many-to-one> > <key-property name="Hardware_Id" type="Guid"> > <column name="HardwareSettings_id" /> > </key-property> > <key-property name="element" > type="MyApp.DataAccess.NHibernate.UserTypes.StringClobUserType, > MyApp.DataAccess.NHibernate, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, > PublicKeyToken=866d4a0fa0599fe0"> > <column name="SettingValue" /> > <type > name="MyApp.DataAccess.NHibernate.UserTypes.StringClobUserType, > MyApp.DataAccess.NHibernate, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, > PublicKeyToken=866d4a0fa0599fe0" /> > </key-property> > <key-property name="mapkey" type="String"> > <column name="SettingName" /> > </key-property> > </composite-id> > <property insert="true" update="false" name="REVTYPE" > type="NHibernate.Envers.Entities.RevisionTypeType, NHibernate.Envers, > Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=e2c5b946037fb7f8" > not-null="true" /> > </class> > </hibernate-mapping> > > > */* created HardwareSettings table */* > create table HardwareSettings ( > HardwareSettings_id UNIQUEIDENTIFIER not null, > SettingValue NTEXT null, > SettingName NVARCHAR(255) not null, > primary key (HardwareSettings_id, SettingName) > ) > > */* created HardwareSettings audition table (with erroneous primary key) > */* > create table HardwareSettings_AUD ( > REV INT not null, > HardwareSettings_id UNIQUEIDENTIFIER not null, > SettingValue NTEXT not null, > SettingName NVARCHAR(255) not null, > REVTYPE TINYINT not null, > primary key (REV, HardwareSettings_id, SettingValue, SettingName) > ) > > > If this cannot be solved by myself or via configuration: > Has someone an idea where to hook in to change the way Envers creates the > schema for the audit tables? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "nhusers" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "nhusers" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] <javascript:>. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] <javascript:> > . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nhusers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
