Thanks Ken. No, all the relationships on both entities are allowed to be null. 
I'm really at a loss to explain how I'm ending up with different values in the 
database than I see going through the setters in the EO.

Tim Worman
UCLA GSE&IS

On Oct 22, 2010, at 7:33 AM, Ken Anderson wrote:

> Do you have any mandatory to-one relationships?
> 
> Whenever I have situations where data is not what it's supposed to be, it 
> ends up that EOF created other objects for me because of mandatory to-one 
> relationships...  I don't know if this is still a problem, but it used to be.
> 
> On Oct 22, 2010, at 10:30 AM, Tim Worman wrote:
> 
>> I have a process that cycles through a bunch of EO's (foos), does some math, 
>> creates related EO's (bars), and inserts the math values into the new EO's. 
>> When I run this process and it cycles through all the foos but the values 
>> that get inserted into bars are not correct. If I restrict the process to 
>> only handling one foo instead of cycling through many, the inserted values 
>> ARE correct.
>> 
>> I've tried inserting some console messages to see what values are passed to 
>> the setters in bars. When I do this they are always correct but what ends up 
>> in the database is different.
>> 
>> Anyone have any ideas what might be causing this and how I can better 
>> diagnose it?
>> 
>> Tim Worman
>> UCLA GSE&IS
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/kenlists%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]

Reply via email to