Hi,
what happens is that if you declare a "kind", you forces all elements to be of
that specific class.
Solution is just not add that property:
<mongoDescription>
^VOMongoToManyDescription new
attributeName: 'members';
accessor: #members;
"kind: Member; "
"<-- NO!"
beLazy;
yourself.
And same happens in the <mongoContainer> description in the top of your
hierarchy... you must NOT declare a kind.
Also, if you want all members to go in just one collection. #isVoyageRoot has
to be implemented in the top of the hierarchy and not in the subclasses
Member
"<-- #isVoyageRoot = true here!"
SingleMember
ComplexMember
what happens then is that voyage will create a collection and for each document
it stores in it will also store the attribute '#instanceOf', which will be used
to retrieve the correct object.
Esteban
what happens then is that
On Aug 31, 2013, at 12:53 AM, Esteban A. Maringolo <[email protected]> wrote:
> More or less, I have this working.
>
> In the Group class I have a description named:
> descriptionMembers
> <mongoDescription>
> ^VOMongoToManyDescription new
> attributeName: 'members';
> accessor: #members;
> kind: Member;
> beLazy;
> yourself
>
>
> And in the Member class I have
> descriptionGroups
> <mongoDescription>
> ^VOMongoToManyDescription new
> attributeName: 'groups';
> accessor: #groups;
> kind: Group;
> beLazy;
> yourself
>
>
>
> But what if Member is an abstract class and the elements can be any of
> SingleMember or ComplexMember?, each one is stored in a separate
> collection in Mongo.
>
> If I do specify #kind: Member in my #descriptionMembers it won't work.
>
> Any ideas?
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Esteban A. Maringolo
>
>
> 2013/8/30 Esteban A. Maringolo <[email protected]>:
>> 2013/8/30 James Foster <[email protected]>:
>>> It seems that I mistook the question for something easy enough for me to
>>> answer! Unfortunately, I don't have any knowledge of Voyage+MongoDB so
>>> can't really give the proper answer.
>>
>> Thanks anyway, it is a problem you'll never find in GemStone/S ;-)
>
