Hi Jakob, At the time I had the problem, I was using RC4. Now I use CVS HEAD (and ODMG API). I'll see if I can find the old code and reproduce the problem with the lastest version of OJB.
Gerhard Jakob Braeuchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 14.10.2003 14:29 Bitte antworten an "OJB Users List" An: OJB Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kopie: Thema: Re: Problem with anonymous keys in 1:n back-mapping (again) hi gerhard, yup, it also works with proxy=false. do you use the latest from repository ? jakob [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi Jakob, > > It was the attribute 'user' that was null, when I made 'userId' anonymous, > and the problem was quite reproducible. I didn't follow up on this because > I moved to the ODMG API, where the problem hasn't occurred so far. > > Does your testcase work when setting proxy=false in the collection > descriptor? > > Unfortunatelly I don't have the original code any more to do more research > on this problem. > > Best regards, > Gerhard > > > > > > Jakob Braeuchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > 13.10.2003 20:42 > Bitte antworten an "OJB Users List" > > > An: OJB Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Kopie: > Thema: Re: Problem with anonymous keys in 1:n back-mapping (again) > > > hi vincent, > > just to make it clear the attribute 'userId' is null because access is > anonymous and no attribute is required in your class. the attribute > 'user' should contain an instance of object User. > > i do have a testcase for this feature and it works. > > <class-descriptor > class="brj.ojb.Person" > table="tabPerson" > > > <field-descriptor id="1" > name="id" > column="id" > jdbc-type="INTEGER" > primarykey="true" > autoincrement="true" > conversion="brj.ojb.TestFieldConversion" > /> > ... > > <collection-descriptor > name="konti" > > collection-class="org.apache.ojb.broker.util.collections.ManageableArrayList" > orderby="saldo" > sort="ASC" > element-class-ref="brj.ojb.Konto" > proxy="true" > refresh="true" > auto-retrieve="true" > auto-update="true" > auto-delete="true" > > > <inverse-foreignkey field-ref="idPerson"/> > > > > <class-descriptor > class="brj.ojb.Konto" > table="tabKonto" > > > <field-descriptor id="1" > name="idKto" > column="id" > jdbc-type="INTEGER" > primarykey="true" > autoincrement="true" > /> > <field-descriptor id="2" > name="idPerson" > column="idPerson" > jdbc-type="INTEGER" > access="anonymous" > /> > ... > <reference-descriptor > name="inhaber" > class-ref="brj.ojb.Person" > > > <foreignkey field-ref="idPerson"/> > </reference-descriptor> > > > > hth > jakob > > > Vincenz Braun wrote: > > >>Hello, >> >>I have the same problem described earlier in this list by >>Gerhard Grosse. What is the status of this issue? Is someone >>working on this or has at least committed a bug report? I queried >>scarab and did not find a matching issue, yet. >> >>Any help greatly appreciated. >>Vincenz >> >> >>original post from Gerhard Grosse: >> >> tried to implement a bi-directional 1:n association between classes > > User > >>and UserRole with an anonymous key in UserRole: >> >><class-descriptor >> class="de.lexcom.noralinkojb.model.User" >> table="OJB.USERS"> >> >> <field-descriptor >> name="id" >> column="ID" >> jdbc-type="INTEGER" >> primarykey="true" >> autoincrement="true"/> >> >> <collection-descriptor >> name="roles" >> element-class-ref="de.lexcom.noralinkojb.model.UserRole" >> auto-retrieve="true" >> auto-update="true" >> auto-delete="true"> >> <inverse-foreignkey field-ref="userId"/> >> </collection-descriptor> >> >></class-descriptor> >> >><class-descriptor >> class="de.lexcom.noralinkojb.model.UserRole" >> table="OJB.USER_ROLES"> >> >> <field-descriptor >> name="userId" >> column="USER_ID" >> jdbc-type="INTEGER" >> primarykey="true" >> access="anonymous"/> >> >> <field-descriptor >> name="role" >> column="ROLE" >> jdbc-type="INTEGER" >> primarykey="true"/> >> >> <reference-descriptor >> name="user" >> class-ref="de.lexcom.noralinkojb.model.User" >> auto-retrieve="true"> >> <foreignkey field-ref="userId"/> >> </reference-descriptor> >> >></class-descriptor> >> >>When I now load a User object which has associated UserRoles, the user >>attribute of all UserRoles is null. The problem disappears when I make >>userId a normal attribute of UserRole. >> >>Is this a known limitation of anonymous keys, is it a bug or am I doing >>something wrong here? >> >> >> >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>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]