Filed http://code.google.com/p/datanucleus-appengine/issues/detail?id=170
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 6:18 PM, Max Ross (Google)
<maxr+appeng...@google.com<maxr%2bappeng...@google.com>
> wrote:
> Ok I think I know what's going on. First here's a stripped down version of
> your object model with the bare minimum needed to reproduce the exception:
>
> @PersistenceCapable(identityType = IdentityType.APPLICATION)
> public class RatePlan {
>
> @PrimaryKey
> @Persistent(valueStrategy = IdGeneratorStrategy.IDENTITY)
> private Key id;
> }
>
> @PersistenceCapable(identityType = IdentityType.APPLICATION)
> public class Activity {
>
> @PrimaryKey
> @Persistent(valueStrategy = IdGeneratorStrategy.IDENTITY)
> private Key id;
>
> @Persistent
> private List<RatePlan> ratePlans = new ArrayList<RatePlan>();
> }
>
> @PersistenceCapable(identityType = IdentityType.APPLICATION)
> public class Bundle {
>
> @PrimaryKey
> @Persistent(valueStrategy = IdGeneratorStrategy.IDENTITY)
> private Key id;
>
> @Persistent
> private RatePlan ratePlan;
>
> public void setRatePlan(RatePlan ratePlan) {
> this.ratePlan = ratePlan;
> }
> }
>
> And here's the unit test I turned your code into that generates the
> exception:
> public void testBryce() {
> pm.newQuery(Activity.class).execute();
>
> Bundle bundle = new Bundle();
> bundle.setRatePlan(new RatePlan());
>
> pm.makePersistent(bundle);
> }
>
> I believe the issue is that RatePlan is owned by two different objects in
> your model - Bundle and Activity. Due to the nature of primary keys in the
> app engine datastore, a class can only have a single owner. We detect other
> flavors of this scenario when the entity meta-data is loaded but not this
> particular variant. I'll file a bug and try to produce a useful exception.
> To work around this you'll need to either switch Activity.ratePlans or
> Bundle.ratePlans to be an unowned relationship and just store the Key of the
> RatePlan rather than the RatePlan itself. Please give that a try and let me
> know how it goes.
>
> Thanks,
> Max
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 10:19 AM, bryce cottam <bcot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> No worries Max, I'm using 1.2.6 right now, so the "multiple instance" bug
>> isn't an issue right now. Whenever you get to it is fine. As always I
>> appreciate your input.
>>
>> Thanks
>> -bryce
>>
>> On Dec 8, 2009 10:14 AM, "Max Ross (Google)"
>> <maxr+appeng...@google.com<maxr%2bappeng...@google.com>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Bryce,
>>
>> I started digging into you issue and quickly bumped into the "Multiple
>> relationships of the same type" bug for which I posted the workaround. Then
>> I got bogged down with unrelated stuff. I have definite plans to get back
>> to your example today. Thanks for being patient, and sorry this is taking
>> so long.
>>
>> Max
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 11:35 PM, bcottam <bcot...@gmail.com> wrote: > >
>> Max, have you had a chance...
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Google App Engine for Java" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to
>> google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<google-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>
>> .
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
>>
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Google App Engine for Java" group.
To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
