Hi Jakob,
Thanks for your answer. I'm afraid noone can pay enough to the ojb-crew to
post the following question. I go for it anyways :-)
Wally wrote in his reply to my question that he thinks the problem is fixed
in the latest CVS (I'm still using RC4 - did not change because our apps
just entered a quite stable state and never change a running system...). So
I have two questions: first, can anyone confirm that the bug is fixed in
latest CVS? And the second question is (I hope I'm not going to be excluded
from the list for this): should I upgrade to the latest CVS or should I wait
for the 1.0 final release. In other words, could we have any estimaton of
the release date (the website says two weeks since about aehm 2 months I
think).
Regards,
Peter
> hi peter,
> how much did you pay to the ojb-crew to get an answer within two days ;)
> anyway, the correct sql would look like this :
> SELECT DISTINCT A0.gar* FROM Garage A0
> LEFT OUTER JOIN Address A1 ON A0.garAddressOID=A1.addOID
> LEFT OUTER JOIN PersonAddress A1E0 ON A0.garAddressOID=A1E0.padOID ...
> so imo this is a bug :(
> jakob
> Peter Wieland wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I posted the message below two days ago, and from my experience I would
>> say
>> if there is no reply within two days, there's very few chance to have an
>> answer at all, that's way I annoy you one more time with this message.
>>
>> This is quite important for us, so I would truly appreciate if someone
>> from
>> the OJB staff (or any other who knows how it works) could give me some
>> hints.
>>
>> I'd like to know if the problem I describe below is a known problem (or a
>> known fact, perhaps you do not consider it a problem?) and if anyone has
>> any
>> suggestions how to proceed in the given case.
>>
>> Thank you once again,
>>
>> Peter
>>
>>
>> --- HIER BEGINNT DIE WEITERGELEITETE NACHRICHT
>> ------------------------------
>> Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Wieland)
>> Datum: 16.02.2004, 17:29:33
>> Betreff: Problem with inheritance mapping
>>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I have two entity classes AddressImpl and PersonAddressImpl,
>> PersonAddressImpl extending AddressImpl (below the interesting parts of
>> my
>> Mapping). A third class - GaragaeImpl - holds a reference to an
>> AddressImpl
>> (might be an AddressImpl or a PersonAddressImpl).
>>
>> <class-descriptor class="de.armax.ce.manager.entity.AddressImpl"
>> table="Address">
>> <extent-class
>> class-ref="de.armax.ce.manager.entity.PersonAddressImpl"/>
>> <field-descriptor autoincrement="true" primarykey="true"
>> column="addOID"
>> jdbc-type="VARCHAR" name="oID"/>
>> ...
>> </class-descriptor>
>>
>> <class-descriptor class="de.armax.ce.manager.entity.PersonAddressImpl"
>> table="PersonAddress">
>> <field-descriptor autoincrement="true" primarykey="true"
>> column="padOID"
>> jdbc-type="VARCHAR" name="oID"/>
>> ...
>> </class-descriptor>
>>
>> <class-descriptor class="de.armax.ce.manager.entity.GarageImpl"
>> table="Garage">
>> ...
>> <field-descriptor column="garAddressOID" jdbc-type="VARCHAR"
>> name="addressOID"/>
>> <reference-descriptor proxy="true" auto-delete="false"
>> auto-retrieve="true"
>> auto-update="false"
>> class-ref="de.armax.ce.manager.entity.AddressImpl"
>> name="address">
>> <foreignkey field-ref="addressOID"/>
>> </reference-descriptor>
>> ...
>> </class-descriptor>
>>
>>
>> As you can see, the primery key column has not the same name for the two
>> tables (whereas the field name is the same for both classes). That's the
>> source of my problem. I try to do a query by criteria with something like
>>
>> Criteria crit = new Criteria();
>> crit.addEqualTo("address.aAddressField", aValue);
>> Collection result =
>> broker.getCollectionByQuery(QueryFactory.newQuery(GarageImpl.class,
>> crit));
>>
>> The generated SQL looks like
>>
>> SELECT DISTINCT A0.gar* FROM Garage A0 LEFT OUTER JOIN Address A1 ON
>> A0.garAddressOID=A1.addOID LEFT OUTER JOIN PersonAddress A1E0 ON
>> A0.garAddressOID=A1E0.addOID ...
>>
>> It seems that OJB is not aware of the different column names for the
>> foreign
>> keys of PersonAddressImpl and AddressImpl entities (the problem only
>> occurrs
>> for primary key columns, other columns are correctly mapped).
>>
>> I would like to know if this is correct behaviour or not, in other words
>> does OJB allow the user to use different foreign key column names in one
>> extent or not. I would equally be interested in any suggestions how to
>> get
>> my code running if possible without renaming the foreign key column of
>> PersonAddressImpl (this would break our global naming and design
>> conventions).
>>
>> Thanks for any help,
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>>
>> --- ENDE DER WEITERGELEITETEN
>> NACHRICHT--------------------------------------
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
