Thanks, that did the trick for the setters. Gary ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Derry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "OJB Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 2:26 PM Subject: Re: More Questions - Joins and Setter Methods
> Hi Gary, > > Sorry I can't respond to your first question. But regarding the use (or > nonuse) of setters, refer to OJB.properties. See the entry for > PersistentFieldClass. Commenting the line that specifies > PersistentFieldDefaultImpl and uncommenting the line that specifies > PersistentFieldPropertyImpl will cause OJB to use your setters rather than > pure reflection. > > Dave Derry > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gary A. Bartlett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Using tutorial 3 as a guide, I have been able to get a 1:1 join working. > > As noted in the documentation, the association is implemented by adding an > > additional attribute to the first persistent object. This additional > > attribute has the type of the second persistent object. > > > > Looking at the log, I see two queries, first a query against the table > > associated with the first persistent class, and then a query against the > > second table. This second query has a where clause as follows: > > > > WHERE CORPORATEMAP_ID = ? > > > > I am wondering if this query is returning all rows for this table, or is > it > > just returning the rows that satisfy the foreign keys in the results set > > from the first query. > > > > The second question I have is whether it is possible to flatten attributes > > via a join. What I would like to do is have an simple attribute in the > > first class that is actually resolved via the join. In this case the > first > > (and only) query would include the join and return the joined attribute. > > Apologies if this description is not clear, let me know if more > > clarification is needed. > > > > Finally, I noticed that OJB does not use the setter methods in the > > persistent class to set the instance variables. Instead it seems to > > directly access the instance variables themselves. Is this normal > behavior, > > or is it due to something odd in my configuration. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Gary Bartlett > > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
