Bugs item #544778, was opened at 2002-04-16 12:30 You can respond by visiting: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=376685&aid=544778&group_id=22866
Category: JBossCMP Group: CVS HEAD >Status: Closed Resolution: Rejected Priority: 5 Submitted By: Christian Riege (lqd) Assigned to: Dain Sundstrom (dsundstrom) Summary: generation of uni-directional CMR b0rked Initial Comment: it seems that when trying to use a UNIdirectional CMR relationship JBossCMP insists on creating a foreign key field on BOTH sides of the relationship. this should not be; JBossCMP should ignore the side of the relationship where no <cmr-field> element is defined. snippet from ejb-jar.xml: <ejb-relation> <ejb-relation-name>A-Uni-B</ejb-relation-name> <ejb-relationship-role> <ejb-relationship-role-name>a-uni-b</ejb-relationship-role-name> <multiplicity>One</multiplicity> <relationship-role-source> <ejb-name>A</ejb-name> </relationship-role-source> <cmr-field> <cmr-field-name>fk_field</cmr-field-name> </cmr-field> </ejb-relationship-role> <ejb-relationship-role> <ejb-relationship-role-name>b-maps-a</ejb-relationship-role-name> <multiplicity>One</multiplicity> <relationship-role-source> <ejb-name>B</ejb-name> </relationship-role-source> </ejb-relationship-role> </ejb-relation> the tables created look like this: table_a a_id a_fk_field table_b b_id b_a_fk_field the field 'b_a_fk_field' should *not* be generated in my opinion as it is not declared in the deployment descriptor; i.e. it has no matching <cmr-field> entry. (jbosscmp-jdbc.xml is empty except for <defaults> element). tested against both jboss 3.0rc1 as well as CVS HEAD. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Dain Sundstrom (dsundstrom) Date: 2002-04-17 12:10 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=251431 When working with an existing DB schem, you need to specify an exact mapping in the jbosscmp-jdbc.xml file. To tell JBossCMP to not create foreign keys for your entity simply add an empty <key-fields/> element to the A side of the relationship in your example below. This is still not a bug, so please don't reopen. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Christian Riege (lqd) Date: 2002-04-17 09:18 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=176671 dain, point taken. the problem is that i have to cope with an existing DB schema and i am not able to convince the CMP engine to deal with it. my schema looks like this: TABLE a (a_id int); TABLE b (b_id int, related_a int); I have two Entity Beans: ABean and BBean. BBean has a CMR method setRelatedA. the mappings in ejb-jar.xml and jbosscmp-jdbc.xml "seem" to be correct in my eyes. Despite this, the CMP layer insists that table 'a' should contain a field 'related_a'. i've packaged this and attached it to this bug. i've also taken the liberty to set this from REJECTED to OPEN again as I think that it is a bug when adopting to an existing schema instead of auto-creating the tables. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Christian Riege (lqd) Date: 2002-04-17 09:17 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=176671 dain, point taken. the problem is that i have to cope with an existing DB schema and i am not able to convince the CMP engine to deal with it. my schema looks like this: TABLE a (a_id int); TABLE b (b_id int, related_a int); I have two Entity Beans: ABean and BBean. BBean has a CMR method setRelatedA. the mappings in ejb-jar.xml and jbosscmp-jdbc.xml "seem" to be correct in my eyes. Despite this, the CMP layer insists that table 'a' should contain a field 'related_a'. i've packaged this and attached it to this bug. i've also taken the liberty to set this from REJECTED to OPEN again as I think that it is a bug when adopting to an existing schema instead of auto-creating the tables. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Dain Sundstrom (dsundstrom) Date: 2002-04-16 19:10 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=251431 As you said this is an opinion thing. I don't think it matters what the default is as long a it works and it can be overriden. If there is community support for this change I'll make it. I'm closing this, as it is not a bug. Start a discussion on the jboss-user list or in the db forum if you really want change. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=376685&aid=544778&group_id=22866 _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
