ok, that worked but only if i make the foreign key
TEST_DATATYPES.TEST_LOOKUP_ID nullable (ie. an optional foreign key). If I
make the column not null in the db and change the mapping to the below,
then I would expect the insert statement of test_datatypes to have the
test_lookup_id populated. Instead, an update is ran to update the value
which is incorrect. See below. Is the optional="false" attribute being
ignored?
FYI: I am using build time enhancement if that matters or not.
<many-to-one name="testLookup" fetch="EAGER" optional="false">
<join-column name="TEST_LOOKUP_ID" nullable="false"
/>
<cascade>
<cascade-all />
</cascade>
</many-to-one>
INSERT INTO I3.TEST_DATATYPES (TEST_DATATYPES_ID,
DEFAULT_TEST_ONE_TO_MANY_ID, TEST_DATATYPES_NAME, TEST_DATE, TEST_TIME,
TEST_DATETIME, TEST_TIMEZONE, TEST_AMT, TEST_IND, IS_TEST, COMMENTS,
IS_ACTIVE, VER_ID, INSERT_DATETIME, INSERT_USER_ID, MODIFY_DATE,
MODIFY_USER_ID) VALUES (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?)
[params=(long) 475, (null) null, (null) null, (null) null, (null) null,
(null) null, (null) null, (double) 0.0, (null) null, (int) 0, (null) null,
(int) 1, (int) 1, (Timestamp) 2007-02-08 08:49:30.015, (long) 34,
(Timestamp) 2007-02-08 08:49:31.062, (long) 1]
INSERT INTO I3.TEST_LOOKUP (TEST_LOOKUP_ID, TEST_LOOKUP_CODE,
TEST_LOOKUP_NAME, TEST_LOOKUP_ALT_NAME, TEST_LOOKUP_ABBR, TEST_LOOKUP_SEQ,
COMMENTS, IS_ACTIVE, VER_ID, MODIFY_DATE, MODIFY_USER_ID) VALUES (?, ?, ?,
?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?) [params=(long) 66, (String) CODE, (null) null,
(String) alt name, (String) Abbrev, (int) 0, (String) my lookup, (int) 1,
(int) 1, (Timestamp) 2007-02-08 08:49:31.078, (long) 1]
UPDATE I3.TEST_DATATYPES SET TEST_LOOKUP_ID = ? WHERE TEST_DATATYPES_ID = ?
[params=(long) 66, (long) 475]
"Marc
Prud'hommeaux"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] To
org> open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
Sent by: "Marc cc
Prud'hommeaux"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject
mail.com> Re: Bug in insert of
bidirectionally mapped many-to-one
relationships
02/07/2007 02:56
PM
Please respond to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
bator.apache.org
Jeff-
Why is that order bad? Is it because it violates your foreign key
constraints, or some other reason?
If it is a foreign key issue, you need to tell OpenJPA to read
foreign keys from the schema in order to ensure that SQL ordering is
done correctly. You can do this by setting the
"openjpa.jdbc.SchemaFactory" property to "native(ForeignKeys=true)".
If that isn't the issue, can you clarify why this is causing problems?
On Feb 7, 2007, at 9:09 AM, Jeff Melching wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I have a bidirectional mapping of a many-to-one relationship as listed
> below. If I have the following code:
>
> TestDatatypes blob = new TestDatatypes();
> TestLookup lookup = new TestLookup();
>
> Set<TestDatatypes> tdts = new HashSet<TestDatatypes>();
> tdts.add(blob);
> lookup.setTestDatatypes(tdts);
> blob.setTestLookup(lookup);
>
> dao.insert(lookup);
>
> It works because the sql insert for the lookup table is ran first,
> but if I
> replace dao.insert(lookup) with dao. insert(blob), then the child
> sql is
> ran before the parent record has been inserted. as listed here:
>
> INSERT INTO TEST_DATATYPES (TEST_DATATYPES_ID, MODIFY_DATE,
> MODIFY_USER_ID,
> COMMENTS, INSERT_DATETIME, INSERT_USER_ID, IS_ACTIVE, IS_TEST,
> TEST_AMT,
> TEST_DATATYPES_NAME, TEST_DATE, TEST_DATETIME, TEST_IND, TEST_TIME,
> TEST_TIMEZONE, VER_ID, TEST_LOOKUP_ID) VALUES
> (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?,
> ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?) [params=(long) 359, (Timestamp) 2007-02-06
> 10:07:12.468, (long) 1, (null) null, (Timestamp) 2007-02-06
> 10:07:11.671,
> (long) 34, (int) 1, (int) 0, (double) 0.0, (null) null, (null)
> null, (null)
> null, (null) null, (null) null, (null) null, (int) 1, (long) 40]
>
> INSERT INTO I3.TEST_LOOKUP (TEST_LOOKUP_ID, MODIFY_DATE,
> MODIFY_USER_ID,
> COMMENTS, IS_ACTIVE, TEST_LOOKUP_ABBR, TEST_LOOKUP_ALT_NAME,
> TEST_LOOKUP_CODE, TEST_LOOKUP_NAME, TEST_LOOKUP_SEQ, VER_ID) VALUES
> (?, ?,
> ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?) [params=(long) 40, (Timestamp) 2007-02-06
> 10:07:12.531, (long) 1, (String) my lookup, (int) 1, (String) Abbrev,
> (String) alt name, (String) CODE, (null) null, (int) 0, (int) 1]
>
> I believe this to be a bug as I have tried the same mappings with
> other jpa
> implementations and it works fine.
>
>
> <entity class="TestDatatypes">
> <table schema="I3" name="TEST_DATATYPES" />
> <sequence-generator name="TestDataTypeSeq"
> sequence-name="SEQ_TEST_DATATYPES_ID" allocation-
> size="1"
> />
> <attributes>
> <id name="testDatatypesId">
> <column name="TEST_DATATYPES_ID" />
> <generated-value strategy="SEQUENCE"
> generator="TestDataTypeSeq" />
> </id>
> ...
> <many-to-one name="testLookup" fetch="EAGER">
> <join-column name="TEST_LOOKUP_ID" />
> <cascade>
> <cascade-all />
> </cascade>
> </many-to-one>
> </attributes>
> </entity>
> <entity class="TestLookup">
> <table schema="I3" name="TEST_LOOKUP" />
> <sequence-generator name="LookupSeq"
> sequence-name="SEQ_TEST_LOOKUP_ID" allocation-
> size="1" />
> <attributes>
> <id name="testLookupId">
> <column name="TEST_LOOKUP_ID" />
> <generated-value strategy="SEQUENCE"
> generator="LookupSeq" />
> </id>
> ...
> <one-to-many name="testDatatypes"
> target-entity=
> "com.ibm.ptp.i3.domain.test.TestDatatypes"
> mapped-by="testLookup" fetch="EAGER">
>
> <cascade>
> <cascade-all />
>
> </cascade>
> </one-to-many>
> </attributes>
> </entity>
