Hi,
in the XML metadata, it is possible to have multiple FCO fields, e.g.
B.a1 and B.a2, with identical mapped-by pointing to the same field of
the same related class, e.g. A.b. In effect this would theoretically
mean that the FK should be shared among different associations in the
object model.
Should the implementation throw an error in such situations, warning the
user of the erroneous metadata?
Shared FK relations are a perfectly valid thing to have IMHO
http://www.datanucleus.org/products/accessplatform_1_1/jdo/orm/one_to_many_collection.html#shared_fk
You could have the same as
Andy Jefferson wrote:
Should the implementation throw an error in such situations, warning the
user of the erroneous metadata?
Shared FK relations are a perfectly valid thing to have IMHO
Hi Andy,
On May 7, 2009, at 9:47 AM, Andy Jefferson wrote:
Should the implementation throw an error in such situations,
warning the
user of the erroneous metadata?
Shared FK relations are a perfectly valid thing to have IMHO
in the XML metadata, it is possible to have multiple FCO fields, e.g.
B.a1 and B.a2, with identical mapped-by pointing to the same field of
the same related class, e.g. A.b. In effect this would theoretically
mean that the FK should be shared among different associations in the
object model. I
Erik Bengtson wrote:
in the XML metadata, it is possible to have multiple FCO fields, e.g.
B.a1 and B.a2, with identical mapped-by pointing to the same field of
the same related class, e.g. A.b. In effect this would theoretically
mean that the FK should be shared among different associations
Hi Craig,
thanks for your answer. I still wonder a bit about implications of
mapped-by when combined with interfaces.
Suppose we have class AImpl with a field b of type interface B, with B
having a property a of type AImpl, and two implementations BImpl1 and
BImpl2 of B, in other words:
class A
Why would you want to have two different fields for the same
association? As far as I can see, it would always hold true that
b.a1==b.a2. You could express that in OCL in your UML, but in most cases
in the jdo metadata the above would be an error. You could still have
another getter getA2()
Hi,
We will have our regular meeting Friday, May 8 at 9 am PDT to discuss
JDO TCK issues and status.
Dial-in numbers are:
Domestic (toll-free): 866 230-6968
International (caller-paid): +1 213 787-0528
Access code : 294-0479#
Agenda:
1. [VOTE] Release JDO2.3 early access
2. JDO 2.3-ea :
