You are right it's all there, Spent the last two days migrating from 2.2 to 2.3 ... At least now ExtendedUser is loaded successfully on each container restart.
Thanks for your time and help Oron -----Original Message----- From: Wei He [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 7:13 PM To: Turbine Developers List Subject: Re: Torque Security Service In ExtendedUser class you provide. E.g. In the shcema, I have <table name="DEPARTMENT" idMethod="native"> <column name="ID" type="NUMERIC" size="18,0" primaryKey="true" required="true" autoIncrement="true"/> ...... </table> <table name="DB_USER" idMethod="idbroker"> <column name="USER_ID", primaryKey="true" required="true" autoIncrement="true"/> .... ... .... <column name="DEPARTMENT_ID" type="NUMERIC" size="18,0" required="true"/> <foreign-key foreignTable="DEPARTMENT"/> <reference local="DEPARTMENT_ID" foreign="ID"/> </foreign-key> </table> In the ExtendedUser.java /** * Get department id. * * @return A BigDecimal contains department id. * */ public BigDecimal getDepartmentId() { return ((DbUser) getPersistentObj()).getDepartmentId(); } /** * Set department id. * * @param departmentid - A BigDecimal contains department id. * */ public void setDepartmentId(BigDecimal departmentid) { try { ((DbUser) getPersistentObj()).setDepartmentId(departmentid); } catch (Exception e) { log.debug("Set department id failed:", e); } } you can do as many as FKs as you wish as long as they appear before your DB_USER table in the schema file. The rest of the instruction is in Henning's post (http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg12645.html). Please go through what he has outlined there. You will have a much better idea how this works. The user_id is INTEGER when using idbroker, I guess if you define the user_id method differently in building Turbine-2.3, you may be able to use other types for USER_ID. I did not try that. But idbroker works just fine unless you have two apps using the same DB. Then you have to do some id management on the DB server. I use Oracle 8i and 9i BTW. Wei oron ogdan wrote: > for some functionality we need the org.apache.turbine.om.security.User > interface, like for asking ExtnededUser.isConfirmed(), and for other cases > we need the torque chain generated class, what am I missing ? > > If I want to extend the user functionality and fields but also let it > participate in foreign table relationships > i.e. SomeTorqueObject.setOwnedBy(SomeExtendedUser) ... > > ??? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wei He [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 12:07 PM > To: Turbine Developers List > Subject: Re: Torque Security Service > > > > The detail was further illustrated in several other posts from Henning: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg12645.html > http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg12663.html > > I followed these instructions, it works ery well. I ended up having only > one schema file for all the tables (total of 94) for conveniences > because of FK linking to other Turbine tables. > > Thanks for the great work, guys. Looking forward to seeing 2.3 final > release. I have being using the dev in the HEAD for a few months in a > beta environment, I have not discovered any problem yet. > > Wei > > Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote: > >>Scott Eade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> >> >>>1. When I define the structure of CUSTOM_USER I want to do this >>>in the project schema file rather than the turbine schema file >>>so that I can have foreign keys to CUSTOM_USER. As a result I >>>will pretty much move everything from the turbine schema file >>>into my project's schema file (in order to have all of the >>>foreign-key references). Unlike in the past where I would >>>define a table as an alias of TurbineUser I should no longer >>>bother with this and just configure turbine to use the om >>>classes generated for my project. Is this correct? >> >> >>Yes. The fact that Torque cannot generate foreign key references to >>tables which are not defined in the same schema is unfortunate (I have >>a project with currently 79 tables... ) but a torque limitation. >> >> >> >> >>>2. In "The elegant way" part of the Torque Security Service >>>page we have: >>> >>> >>>>public class CustomUser extends TorqueUser >>> >>>Can you please clarify which class is extending what - I >>>assume when I generate my project om I will have CustomUser >>>extending BaseCustomUser extending BaseObject. Which specific >>>TorqueUser class is being extended and by which specific class. >> >> >>This is two-layered. >> >>There is the Torque generated stuff: >> >>DATABASE_USER ---> DatabaseUser, DatabaseUserPeer, BaseDatabaseUser, > > BaseDatabaseUserPeer > >>Those classes do _not_ implement the necessary Security Object >>Interfaces (like User, Group, Role, Permission). So there is a layer >>in between which uses reflection to transfer fields from the database >>peers into our security objects. These objects are TorqueUser, >>TorqueGroup, TorquePermission, TorqueRole. If you use just the >>"normal" fields, you're done here. You configure the Security Service >>to return the Torque<xxx> objects and the TorqueSecurityService >>automagically maps all the needed information from the Torque >>generated peers. >> >>Now, if you want to use custom columns, you must extend the objects > > implementing > >>the Security interfaces. These are the Torque<xxx> objects: >> >>package de.intermeta.application.security; >> >>import org.apache.turbine.services.security.torque.TorqueUser; >> >>public class ExtendedUser extends TorqueUser >>{ >>... >>} >> >>This is still an object which implements "User". You configure the >>SecurityService (!) to return objects of this type as User objects: >> >>services.SecurityService.user.class = > > de.intermeta.application.security.ExtendedUser > >>Note that this is the Security Service itself! Not the > > TorqueSecurityService! > >>Your custom user is then responsible to map the additional columns >>onto the underlying database peer object. >> >>E.g. if you use >> >><table name="CUSTOM_USER" idMethod="idbroker"> >>[... turbine stuff ...] >> <column name="TELEPHONE" size="32" type="VARCHAR" javaName="Phone" /> >></table> >> >>as your database peer, you get >> >>CUSTOM_USER ---> CustomUser, CustomUserPeer, BaseCustomUser, > > BaseCustomUserPeer > >>and you configure the TorqueSecurityService to use this as peer: >> >>services.SecurityService.torque.userPeer.class = CustomUserPeer >> >> >>public class ExtendedUser extends TorqueUser >>{ >> public String getPhone() >> { >> return ((CustomUser) getPersistentObj()).getPhone(); >> } >> >>getPersistentObj() gets the underlying Torque object, which is a >>CustomUser object (because we configured the TSS to use it as peer >>objects), so we can cast it. Then we can simply call getPhone() and >>return the value. >> >>The "ExtendedUser" is an adapter between the Torque based objects and >>the security service objects (which must implement the Security >>Service interfaces). >> >>Clearer now? I fixed some bugs in the torque-security-service.xml >>docs, too. >> >> Regards >> Henning >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
