My recommendation is that you try the default (lazy) first, and then start
optimizing as needed.
When you do, keep in mind eager fetching is not the only alternative.
There's also caching and batch-size; you should understand all of them and
see which one fits best each particular case.
Diego
Thank you very much for your reply, I agree with you that it is better
to transform it to an entity, I just wanted to ask you about this
issue
now in this case I will use lazy false for the first link one-to-many
and olso
the second link one-to-many,
how do you setup the depth of the object graph,
No.
Because, I prefer for many-to-many and when the relation will have
properties then I transform it to an entity
btw
2010/3/30 Visar Uruqi
> Thank you Fabio, this sounds very interesting, do you have any example
> how to use this map-key-many-to-many a link or something.
>
> visar
>
>
Thank you Fabio, this sounds very interesting, do you have any example
how to use this map-key-many-to-many a link or something.
visar
On Mar 30, 3:54 pm, Fabio Maulo wrote:
> Map (Dictionary) with map-key-many-to-many and a component
> (composite-element) as value.
>
> 2010/3/30 Visar Uruqi
>
Map (Dictionary) with map-key-many-to-many and a component
(composite-element) as value.
2010/3/30 Visar Uruqi
> OK I got the Idea, but suppose that middle table is not a entity,
> suppose it is just a
> middle table for many-to-many relationship, how would you handle it in
> a XML mapping file?
OK I got the Idea, but suppose that middle table is not a entity,
suppose it is just a
middle table for many-to-many relationship, how would you handle it in
a XML mapping file?
Visar
Thank you for your replies
On Mar 30, 1:49 pm, Kim Johansson
wrote:
> That's not a many-many relation... That's
