Hmm, what I get for writing docs without stepping through code carefully enough.

Armin has pointed out that using anonymous keys for PK's is going to bomb if used in a clustered environment (or anywhere that persistent objects are serialized and migrated) and he is completely correct!

Anyone using them as I documented in the HOWTO be warned =) I will fix the howto asap, but for personal reasons... that may not be as soon as I like =/

-Brian

On Feb 3, 2004, at 7:34 AM, Armin Waibel wrote:

Hi Ralf,

it does deal with anonymous fields, but only in conjunction with 1:1 references. Please post class-descriptor and source for Customer, Car.

regards,
Armin

Ralf Bode wrote:

Hi Armin.
okay i didnīt know about 1.0rc5 isnīt
dealing with anonymous-keys.
so i do like suggested in 1:1-mapping.
but then in my Beans i have
int carId
Car car;
i do now:
setCar(Car c){
car = c;
carId = c.getId();
}
but i think this is redundant, isnīt ?
now i am very confused on dealing with OJB...
a short, and last question,
why doesnīt OJB1.0.rc5 not deal with anonymous-keys
i thought its a nice feature!
greetings ralf
 --- Armin Waibel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: > Hi,
Ralf Bode wrote:

Hi Armin,
thanks for your patience, first!
but the things with declaring PK_Fields
i read at:


http://db.apache.org/ojb/howto-use-anonymous-keys.html
i did everything like told me :-)
the document is written nice and understandful,

doh! Assume the current implementation doesn't
achieve this. All anonymous keys are held in an internal map using the
object itself as key. Reading will be successful, but when the object
e.g. will be serialized and then returned to OJB the anonymous PK
field will never be found (object does not match a key), its only
possible to extract the FK from the associated reference object.
Thus I think anonymous keys will only work in
conjunction with 1:1 references.
I don't write the 'anonymous-key' stuff, so maybe I
overlooked an important argument.


regards,
Armin



but only the little thing froeign-key is null in my case...

did you know if this sample is available?
i didnīt found it in src-distribution.

thanks alot!

--- Armin Waibel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: >

Hi


Ralf,


but in my case the own idīs
of a class where anonymous too,
is that the matter?

AFAIK we don't have a test case that mix this

stuff.


Think it is not allowed to declare a PK field
anonymous.
Recommend you to setup a test case similar to the
examples in test suite or docu
(http://db.apache.org/ojb/tutorial3.html#Mapping

1:1


associations). As recently as your test pass start
to tweak ;-)

regards,
Armin


Ralf Bode wrote:



Hi Armin, again...
...sorry...

i looked in samples you told me!
(thanks for tipps!)
but i have all so like
1:1-relationship
org.apache.ojb.broker.ObjectRepository$Group
org.apache.ojb.broker.ObjectRepository$Componente
(access="anonymous" for reffered ids)
but in my case the own idīs
of a class where anonymous too,
is that the matter?
but i donīt think so, because
for car and customer a id is "generated".

But only!!! the reffered id (in customer for car is "null")

...strangely... isnīt it ?

perhaps i can send it to list / to you?
(i asked, because i will not blow up list
with my (i think) foolishness)

thanks for your patience!
ralf
--- Armin Waibel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: >

Hi



Ralf,



Ralf Bode wrote:



hi ... again :-(

it is really frustratingly...
i turned OTM->true
made:
customer.setCar(car)
broker.store(customer);


I don't know what's wrong with your test, but

this


will definitely work with the PB-api.
You can find many examples in test suite, e.g. ...broker.AnonymousFieldsTest.


regards,
Armin




but same...
customer is in DB, car not!
:-(

i have read in aritcle in german-javamag
on OJB there was said "all is nice"

or am i to stuid?

i though it would be possible
to store "customer" and his car...
has anyone a "runnig"-case for an idot, like

me?


thanks!




--- Brian McCallister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: >

Objects




are not automatically stored by reachability




-- the car isn't inserted because it is attached to Customer.

This



*can* actually be done in the OTM if Car is a truly dependent

object



(otm-dependent attribute), but in the PB an object must be

made


explicitly persistent.

broker.store(ca);
broker.store(cu);

-Brian

On Feb 2, 2004, at 3:13 PM, Ralf Bode wrote:





Hi Brian,
now i got an "anonym" id
(very nice, so i now have "pure" javaBeans
no technicals in it :-)

i made
cu = new Custiomer();
ca = new Car();
cu.setCar(ca);
broker.store(cu);

now only a customer was in DB

i must add the "auto-*" in descriptor:
<reference-descriptor
name="car"
class-ref="de.ralle.Car"
auto-retrive="true"
auto-update="true"
auto-delete="true">

=== message truncated === __________________________________________________________________
Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de
Mit Yahoo! Suche finden Sie alles: http://suche.yahoo.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]





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



Reply via email to