Shiva, it is possible to map 2 different classes to the same table even if you need to be aware of problems when changed objects are persisted or loaded after that change. The problem is that both classes have separate caches and they get inconsistent when objects are changed. The best idea to omit these problems is to switch of caching for both of this classes.
The many problem you will have with your idea is that every object needs a unique identity. If you create class A for (col1, col2, col3) for the 1 side of your 1:m relation, you will not have a unique identity as there will be multiple records for all combinations of (col1, col2, col3) in the database. For class B, m side of the 1:m relation, holding values of the columns (col4, col5, col6) there may be similar problems as I don't know if one (or a combination) of the columns can be used as identity. If you do not have columns in (col1, col2, col3, col4, col5, col6) that can be used as identity (primary key) it will not be possible to use castor to access this data at all. You should also be aware that castor do not support foreign keys that are part of primary keys. Without more details on the constraints of the data in the table it is impossible for me to tell you if and how you can map this data with castor. It would also be important if you only want to load the data or if you also want to create new or update existing ones. But even if the constrains are ideal it will not be possible to load the data into 2 classes with a 1:m relation directly by castor. Regards Ralf Shiva P. Kodityala schrieb: > Ralf > > Is it not possible because both the classes point to the same table? Or some > other reason? > > Thanks > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ralf Joachim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 8:08 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [castor-user] A mapping question > > > Hi Shiva, > > I'm sorry but this is not possible with castor at the moment. You need > to find a workaround on your java objects for this to work. > > Regards > Ralf > > > Shiva P. Kodityala schrieb: > >>I have an not-normalized table which is already existing. >> >>tableX(col1, col2, col3,col4,col5,col6) >> >>For every (col1, col2, col3), there are number of(col4,col5,col6). Can I have >>a classA mapping to first part and classB mapping to second part and have a >>relation 1:m? - Is it possible? If so, do I have to take any precautions? If >>not, what is the better approach? Of course, I am not authorized to change >>the design of existing table. So, Both the classes point to the same table. >>Ultimately, I want to get normalized data into my java objects without extra >>processing. >> >>Thanks for help. >> >> >>------------------------------------------------- >>If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please >>send an empty message to the following address: >> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>------------------------------------------------- > > > ------------------------------------------------- > If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please > send an empty message to the following address: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ------------------------------------------------- > > > ------------------------------------------------- > If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please > send an empty message to the following address: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ------------------------------------------------- -- Syscon Ingenieurbüro für Meß- und Datentechnik GmbH Ralf Joachim Raiffeisenstraße 11 D-72127 Kusterdingen Germany Tel. +49 7071 3690 52 Mobil: +49 173 9630135 Fax +49 7071 3690 98 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: www.syscon-world.de ------------------------------------------------- If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please send an empty message to the following address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------
