Hi Thomas, This may be a bit off topic....
I use OJB exclusively in a web application environment. When a web form posts to one of my actions I only pass the ids of any dependent objects (from a list box etc...). I would like to set this id on my target object and then store it. Of course, this does not work. So currently I do something like. A a = new a(); B b = new b(); b.setID(dependentID); a.setB(b); pb.store(a); Is there a better way to do this? Using the OID of the dependent object to send on the post seems ideal, but I have to do some extra coding to "reconstruct" my object in my action class. -Jason Hale Wingate Web > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 12:29 PM > To: OJB Users List > Subject: Re: Anybody else have this problem?/Feature Idea > > I absolutely agree with Charles! > the automatic handling of foreign keys was build to let developers > concentrate on business objects and not on rdbms details. > > Thomas > > Charles Anthony wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Developer should only ever set foo, and should never set fooId. > > > > OJB manages all foreign keys. > > > > In our app, we don't generate setters for any id fields (primary or > > foreign), and we only have a getter for the PK. Therefore, the > developers > > find it much harder to fiddle with the keys. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Charles. > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
