You really need to set both directions - EOF will not do it for you.
On Sep 26, 2006, at 3:38 PM, Dev WO wrote:
Hi zak,
Dev WO wrote on 9/25/06 1:26 PM:
So this one is a oneToOne relationship, with is specified in both
entities A and B.
[...]
A and B have a foreign key to each other, but only A gets it... B's
foreign key stay "null".
I think you may not be modeling the relationship correctly. If you
really want a 1-to-1, A and B should share the same primary key and A
should be propagating its primary key to B.
If both tables have their own primary keys, and both have foreign
keys
to each other, things don't really stand up from a relational logic
point of view because you actually have two relationships -- A is
joined
to B by by A.b_id and B is joined to A by B.a_id.
Assuming that A.setB() is defined in terms of A.b_id, the reason
B.a_id
doesn't update is that B.a() is defined by B.a_id but the
relationship
you just set is defined by A.b_id. You have two separate
relationships
based on two separate keys.
HUUUUUU I feel stupid...not the first time though, and probably not
the last one too;)
In my case, B can exist alone (without any A to relating to it),
but A cannot exist alone, it must be linked to a B.
Does this change anything?
I'll try to make the relationship between pks.
Thanks:)
Xavier
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/lists%
40anderhome.com
This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
This email sent to [email protected]
