Field?
Thanks,
Vincenz
> -Original Message-
> From: Jakob Braeuchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 4:45 PM
> To: OJB Users List
> Subject: Re: Problem with anonymous keys in 1:n back-mapping (again)
>
>
> hi vincenz,
>
>
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
ct to be materialized from the PB to return the correct field
values?
Thank you very much,
Vincenz
-Original Message-
From: Jakob Braeuchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 8:42 PM
To: OJB Users List
Subject: Re: Problem with anonymous keys in 1:n back-mapping (
the PB to return the correct field
values?
Thank you very much,
Vincenz
> -Original Message-
> From: Jakob Braeuchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 8:42 PM
> To: OJB Users List
> Subject: Re: Problem with anonymous keys in 1:n back-mapping (ag
t;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:
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 attri
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
'
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.
...
collection-class="o
I am looking into it. I presume you are using the PB api based on the
auto-* being set. I have an almost identical mapping that works fine,
but am using the OTM...
I'll play with it against the PB tonight with the auto-* set they way
you do and see what I can find. If there is no bug open on it
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
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
Hi all,
I tried to implement a bi-directional 1:n association between classes User
and UserRole with an anonymous key in UserRole:
When I now load a User object which has associate
12 matches
Mail list logo