It would be feasible to refactor ManyToMany to remove this restriction.
OneToMany does not require either side to be saved first.
Can you describe a use case where it would be desirable?
-------------------------------------
Jim Barrows<jim.barr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 11:43 AM, GA <my_li...@me.com> wrote:
> I have made a test that worked. I have modified my code like this:
>
> newUser.save
> newUser.devices += newDevice
> newUser.save
>
> The newDevice was already saved. It looks like both parents must be saved
> before I save the relationship. Am I right? or I am doing something wrong?
>
No, you always have to save the parents before the relationship. Well.. as
long as the relationship table has the parents PK as it's PK's anyway.
If you remove that restriction, then nah.. it doesn't matter. Of course
that way lies madness....
> Thanks,
>
> GA
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 26, 2009, at 6:55 PM, GA wrote:
>
> Hello guys,
>
> I have a many-to-many relationship between two mappers called, Users and
> Devices.
>
> There is also an API that receives and XML message that contains one user
> and one device.
>
> The API could create the Device and User with the relationship or it could
> create only the relationship in case the users and/or device already exists.
>
> The problem I have is that the API creates the User and the Device, but the
> not the relationship. This is the code that saves the records (just a test
> for a now):
>
> def addUser(req: Req): LiftResponse = {
>
> var tempUserName = ""
> var tempDeviceName = ""
> var deviceAlreadyExists = false
>
> val newUser = new User
> val newDevice = new Device
> req.xml match {
> case Full(<person>{parameters @_*}</person>) => {
> for(parameter <- parameters){ parameter match {
> case <userName>{userName}</userName> =>
> tempUserName = userName.text
> case <firstName>{firstName}</firstName> =>
> newUser.firstName(firstName.text)
> case <lastName>{lastName}</lastName> =>
> newUser.lastName(lastName.text)
> case <password>{password}</password> =>
> newUser.password(password.text)
> case <email>{email}</email> =>
> newUser.email(email.text)
> case <createdon>{createdOn}</createdon> =>
> newUser.createdOn(new java.util.Date(createdOn.text))
> case <updatedon>{updatedOn}</updatedon> =>
> newUser.updatedOn(new java.util.Date(updatedOn.text))
> case <device>{deviceName}</device> =>
> tempDeviceName = deviceName.text
> case _ =>
> }
> }
> try {
> Device.find(By(Device.deviceName,tempDeviceName))
> match {
> case Full(deviceRequested) =>
> deviceAlreadyExists = true
> case _ => {
> newDevice.deviceName(tempDeviceName)
> newDevice.createdBy(tempUserName)
> newDevice.createdOn(newUser.createdOn)
> newDevice.updatedBy(tempUserName)
> newDevice.updatedOn(newUser.updatedOn)
> newDevice.save
> }
> }
> User.find(By(User.userName, tempUserName)) match {
> case Full(userRequested) =>
> CreatedResponse(wrapXmlBody(<operation
> id="addPerson" success="1"></operation>), "text/xml")
> case _ => {
> newUser.userName(tempUserName)
> newUser.createdBy(tempUserName)
> newUser.updatedBy(tempUserName)
> newUser.devices.clear
> newUser.validated(true)
> *newUser.devices += newDevice*
> newUser.save
> CreatedResponse(wrapXmlBody(<operation
> id="addPerson" success="0"></operation>), "text/xml")
> }
> }
> }
> catch {
> case e => Log.error("Could not add person/device",
> e); BadResponse()
> }
> }
> case _ => Log.error("Request was malformed "+req.view);
> BadResponse()
> }
> }
>
> The field "devices" is the MappedManyToMany field within the User mapper.
>
> What am I doing wrong?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> GA
>
>
>
>
>
> >
>
--
James A Barrows
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
