Re: Bug in PersistenceBroker.getCount() ?

[Jakob Braeuchi]

hi scott,

i just did some tests with proxied m:n association where getCount() is 
called. i changed the test-classes to have a difference between 
column-name and attribute-name.  so far everything was ok.
the attribute-name will be translated into column-name by the 
SqlGenerator., so there should be no need to specify it in getCount().

jakob



Scott Howlett wrote:

I just changed my database schema such that one of my tables now has a
primary key field whose name is different than the column name in the
database.
Things worked OK in general until I referenced the table from another
table via an M:N association. I then got an SQL exception complaining
that I was trying to access the table using the field name, not the
column name.
I think I've traced the problem to PersistenceBrokerImpl.getCount(Query)
- in this routine a report query is made, but it's being populated with
attribute names, not column names. The offending lines of code:
for (int i = 0; i < pkFields.length; i++)
{
   if (query.isDistinct())
   {
       columns[i] = "count(distinct " + pkFields[i].getAttributeName()
+ ")";
   }
   else
   {
       columns[i] = "count(" + pkFields[i].getAttributeName() + ")";
   }
}
Should the above getAttributeName() calls should be replaced with
getColumnName() instead?
Regards,
Scott Howlett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]