Here's a bit clearer example of the problem:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<Visit sent-to-queue="false">
<add-visit-datas id="0">
<enhanced-session-id>123</enhanced-session-id>
<name>foo</name>
<value>bar</value>
</add-visit-datas>
<add-visit-datas id="0">
<enhanced-session-id>123</enhanced-session-id>
<name>foo2</name>
<value>bar2</value>
</add-visit-datas>
<add-visit-datas id="0"
xsi:type="java:com.classesusa.beans.AddVisitData"
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance";>
<enhanced-session-id>123</enhanced-session-id>
<name>foo</name>
<value>bar</value>
</add-visit-datas>
<add-visit-datas id="0"
xsi:type="java:com.classesusa.beans.AddVisitData"
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance";>
<enhanced-session-id>123</enhanced-session-id>
<name>foo2</name>
<value>bar2</value>
</add-visit-datas>
</Visit>
Just yesterday end-of-day, I realized that, if this is any problem at all,
it's not the problem that was actually holding me up with my work (that was
'downstream' of this Castor issue -- a Hibernate issue). However, this
Castor problem is perhaps still bona fide in terms of efficiency.
That is, I now think that marshalling a Collection (in this case,
addVisitDatas) in such a way as to wrap sets of the members of the
Collection's element-type (in this case, AddVisitData) in an XML-element
named with the name of the Collection-variable (addVisitDatas) is preferable
to what one gets when one includes "container='false'", which wraps such
Collection-element data in an XML-element named with the Collection
element's type (AddVisitData).
I now think that's actually more efficient, in that it saves on XML-elements
in the way it deals with the effectively anonymous Collection-elements.
However, in the example above, those two add-visit-datas elements are
repeated. The second time, the only differences are the xsi:type and
xmlns:xsi attributes. Since, in this case, Castor is being used to marshall
objects through JMS-messaging, we're consequently sending messages that are
about twice as big as they need (or should need) to be.
So, the upshot is that I now think there's really only one problem; and it's
not really holding me up; it's just a matter of currently sending a
needlessly fat message through JMS.
Is there a way to send only the one set of two add-visit-datas elements, to
optimize the message?
Keith Visco wrote:
>
>
> I'm having a bit of a problem understanding the issue. Can you provide an
> example of the object you are trying to marshal, the mapping file, the
> expected
> result and the actual result. I know you've provided pieces of this with
> an
> introductory explanation, but I am not following the problem with the
> pieces
> that you have provided.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Keith
>
>
> llefever wrote:
>> There are two problems with the following result of marshalling.
>>
>> In that result, "more-visit-data" must have been derived from the
>> collection-variable named "moreVisitData" in class Visit; it appears as
>> many
>> times as should instances of the element it contains in Java -- of type
>> AddVisitData; meanwhile, the elements of the contained type are not in an
>> element called AddVisitData; I found something elsewhere about setting
>> "container='false'" on the field-element in the config; I tried that; it
>> seemed to work, except that there was still a doubling of the output,
>> with
>> the second instance of the whole message containing "xsi:type" and NOT
>> showing the beneficial effect of "container='false'".
>>
>> The Visit class has these methods on it:
>>
>> public void setMoreVisitData(Set moreVisitData) {
>> this.moreVisitData = moreVisitData;
>> }
>>
>> public Set getMoreVisitData() {
>> return moreVisitData;
>> }
>>
>>
>> I've so far killed an entire day tried to solve this problem. Any
>> feedback
>> would be much appreciated.
>>
>>
>> =======================================================
>>
>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>>
>> <Visit>
>>
>> <more-visit-data id="0">
>> <enhanced-session-id>127.0.0.11174943003584</enhanced-session-id>
>> <name>foo</name>
>> <value>bar</value>
>> </more-visit-data>
>>
>> <more-visit-data id="0">
>> <enhanced-session-id>127.0.0.11174943003597</enhanced-session-id>
>> <name>foo2</name>
>> <value>bar2</value>
>> </more-visit-data>
>>
>> ...
>>
>> <more-visit-data id="0" xsi:type="java:com.foo.beans.AddVisitData"
>> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance";>
>> <enhanced-session-id>127.0.0.11174943003584</enhanced-session-id>
>> <name>foo</name>
>> <value>bar</value>
>> </more-visit-data>
>>
>> ...
>>
>> </Visit>
>>
>>
>> =======================================================
>>
>> Here's the config for that:
>>
>> <class name="com.foo.beans.Visit" auto-complete="true">
>> <map-to xml="Visit"/>
>>
>> <field name="MoreVisitData"
>> type="com.classesusa.beans.AddVisitData" collection="set"/>
>> </class>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
>
> http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/collection-var-name-misinterpreted-as-collection-element-type--hence-%27occurs-more-than-once%27--etc.-tf3470145.html#a9715061
Sent from the Castor - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
