Hello, we have a mapping with a 1:m relation in it:
<class-descriptor class="edu.iu.uis.pur.req.bo.Requisition"
table="PUR.PUR_REQS_T">
<field-descriptor column="REQS_ID" jdbc-type="INTEGER" name="id"
primarykey="true"
sequence-name="PUR.REQS_ID" autoincrement="true"/>
... many other fields .....
<field-descriptor column="VER_NBR" jdbc-type="INTEGER" locking="true"
name="version"/>
<collection-descriptor auto-retrieve="true" auto-update="object"
auto-delete="object" proxy="true"
element-class-ref="edu.iu.uis.pur.req.bo.RequisitionItem" name="items">
<inverse-foreignkey field-ref="requisitionId"/>
</collection-descriptor>
</class-descriptor>
<class-descriptor class="edu.iu.uis.pur.req.bo.RequisitionItem"
table="PUR.PUR_REQS_ITM_T">
<field-descriptor column="REQS_ID" jdbc-type="INTEGER"
name="requisitionId" primarykey="true"/>
<field-descriptor column="ITM_LN_NBR" jdbc-type="INTEGER"
name="itemLineNumber" primarykey="true"/>
....many other fields...
<field-descriptor column="VER_NBR" jdbc-type="INTEGER" locking="true"
name="version"/>
</class-descriptor>
There are times in our process where we add a new item to the items
collection in our Requisition, then we delete it before saving the
collection.
When we do this, we get an OptimisticLockException because OJB is
trying to delete the object that was never in the table. Here is
sample code that causes this:
Requisition req = reqService.getRequisitionById(new Integer(1517));
// Add a blank one
RequisitionItem ri = new RequisitionItem();
req.getItems().add(ri);
// Remove it
req.getItems().remove(ri);
broker.store(req);
Is this because of something we are doing or is it a bug? We're using
version 1.0.0.
Thanks
Jay
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
