Hi,
I've got a 1:n mapping from table A to table B. But the foreign key field of
table A is not it's primary key. I can't find how to tell OJB to use another
field to join table B.
Thanks for help, Norbert.
-
To unsubscribe, e
=mykey column=mycolumn jdbc-type=INTEGER/
Here mykey is the foreignkey but not a primary key !
OJB generates statements where mykey points to the pk of class A. The
generated join looks like: A.pk = B.mykey
We need: A.anyField = B.mykey
In fact I think we've a m:n mapping without intermediary table
I have a non-decomposed relationship between object A and B. Using ODMG, if I remove
a B from the collection of B's in A and commit, not only is the relationship entry in
the indirection table deleted but so is B's record. Is there anyway to turn this off
as auto-delete=false has no effect.
, 2003 1:41 PM
To: 'OJB Users List'
Subject: non-decomposed mapping and deletions in ODMG
I have a non-decomposed relationship between object A and B. Using ODMG, if I remove
a B from the collection of B's in A and commit, not only is the relationship entry in
the indirection table deleted but so
Thank it works fine
remi
- Original Message -
From: Nick Ohanian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: OJB Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 7:36 PM
Subject: Re: Mapping association in one table
Hi-
I'm a little new at OJB, but I think it's possible. Take a look
Hi-
I'm a little new at OJB, but I think it's possible. Take a look at the
section on nested objects at
http://db.apache.org/ojb/tutorial3.html#nested%20objects, specifically
the class-descriptor listed in that section.
Your repository.xml should something like
class-descriptor class=A table=A
[],
perhaps i'm making a wrong mapping??
Anyone knows a better way?
Thanks
mapping in postgre
Hello, i'm trying insert a blob record in postgreSQL, but every time i
get an SQLException, UnknownType.
The repository_user.xml looks like
field-descriptor
name=resource
column=resource
jdbc-type=BLOB
/
In the class, it's mapped like
Hello,
I just tried m:n anonymous mapping, using xdoclet generated descriptors.
Seems to work fine except it's possible to delete from object from one
side of the relation whithout cascading or foreign key constraint being
thrown althoug this is definetly a violation of the DB-Rules
Hi Rice,
Rice Yeh wrote:
Hi Thomas,
I am not familiar with ODMG but I will go to study
it. One question needs your help, is it meant that in
the mapping file for this DListImpl I do not need to
configure the attribute element-class-ref for
collection-descriptor tag?
That's correct!
If a class
Hi Archie,
I will try to come out all the files needed to be
modified in order to support interface traversing in
nested field mapping and send it to your email
address. The basic idea is that I introduce a new
attribute called class-path to configure the
concrete classes for abstract class
times faster.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 5:06 AM
Subject: RE: Simple performance improvement Re: m:n relations mapping...
Hello Andy,
I will have a look at it when I have time.
Please post
: Simple performance improvement Re: m:n relations mapping...
Excellent.
Now how about going one step further and eliminating extra SELECT ? :-)))
We do not need to retrieve link table entries in case of new objects.
Class: org.apache.ojb.broker.core.PersistenceBrokerImpl:
Method
PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 8:11 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: tool for generating mapping file and persistent classes
Naveen Singh dijo:
Hi,
I am new to OJB. I have a database from which I want to generate
mapping
file( repository.xml) and the persistent java classes. I found 2
with a
feild's class stored in a row, it is possible to
implement ploymorphic. With serializable object stored
as binary, much informatin is lost for doing query
(for example, I just want query elements with some
specific class in a containing object). Am I right?
Another issue I met in mapping
performance improvement Re: m:n relations mapping...
Hello Andy,
I will have a look at it when I have time.
Please post messages like this to the OJB
users' or developers' list.
Thank you,
Olli
-Original Message-
From: Andy Malakov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday
Hi,
Yes, I agree your statement. I like OJB, but
sometimes I feel OJB does not continue enhanceing its
mapping capability. Hibernate does have better mapping
capability. Since the introduction of anonymous
field into OJB which I quite like it, OJB does not
improve mapping capability much. Maybe
Hi,
I am new to OJB. I have a database from which I want to generate mapping
file( repository.xml) and the persistent java classes. I found 2 tools
mentioned at OJB site. One is reverse-db and other Eclipse plugin.
I tried both.
In the reverse-db tool everything is fine, except, I cannot
mapping capability. Hibernate does have better mapping
capability. Since the introduction of anonymous
field into OJB which I quite like it, OJB does not
improve mapping capability much. Maybe too much effort
is taken on JDO implementation. But since JDO 1.0
itself does not regulate much
Naveen Singh dijo:
Hi,
I am new to OJB. I have a database from which I want to generate mapping
file( repository.xml) and the persistent java classes. I found 2 tools
mentioned at OJB site. One is reverse-db and other Eclipse plugin.
Try druid - http://druid.sf.net/
But download it from
Natural Resources Research Center/USGS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(970)226-9291
List-Id: OJB Users List ojb-user.db.apache.org
Subject: o/r mapping question
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 21:14:16 -0500
Thread-Topic: o/r mapping question
From: Robert J Celestino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: OJB Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED
Hi,
I have been using OJB for some period. I am taking a
project left by a partner that uses Hinbernate for
persistence. So I start studying Hibernate. Hibernate
has a mapping function called any type mapping that
is defined as the follows:
The any mapping element defines a polymorphic
Still no clue on what is wrong with this.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Friday, October 31, 2003 3:19 pm
Subject: Re: RE: Another silly newbie mapping question
Thank you Robert, but Offers are permanent pieces of information
in the database whereas OrderItems
and I want to
understand this just for the sake of understanding.
JohnE
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sunday, November 2, 2003 5:24 pm
Subject: Re: RE: Another silly newbie mapping question
Still no clue on what is wrong with this.
- Original Message
I have worked out much harder mapping problems then this, but for some reason I am
still a bit new on this stuff and making no headway. I would appreciate a more
seasoned glance.
Problem: OfferVO is not being materialized after succesfully retrieving the
Collection of OrderItemVO by using
Hello,
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am uncertain whether we should fix it because it does
mean a (very minor) change of behaviour. I tend to 'yes'.
I have just committed a fix.
Olli
implementation.
From the archives it seemed ok to map multiple primary keys to one primary key.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Friday, October 31, 2003 2:49 am
Subject: Re: Another silly newbie mapping question
Still no luck. I noticed that my primary key order might
silly newbie mapping question
I give up for the night. BTW I am using Release Candidate 2.
Not sure it matters, but I am using
PersistentFieldClass=org.apache.ojb.broker.metadata.fieldacc
ess.PersistentNestedFieldMaxPerformanceImpl so that I could
use '-' Single Table
Potentially stupid question, but I could not find anything on mapping a
hashmap/hashtable. Consider this
Item has an ItemPrice.
ItemPrice contains a HashMap of condition/price pairs.
So you can do stuff like:
anItemPrice.getPriceForCondition( Good
: More 1:0..1 optional mapping trouble
Hi!
Now, if I update an object that hasn't the 1:1 optional mapping, ojb is
always inserting a new object!!!
Presently there are two serious bugs in 1:1 optional mappings:
1) If using proxies, and the optional side is NULL, it don't return true if
comparing
I have a class heirarchy, and there are 30 different concrete classes in it.
There is NO difference in the data, just in behavior. I'm well aware of how
to read these in from a common table using a RowReader.
Do I have to write 30 class-descriptors all of which look exactly the same
except
in main
object, all came to expected.
Edson Richter
- Original Message -
From: Edson Carlos Ericksson Richter
To: 'OJB Users List'
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 3:43 PM
Subject: More 1:0..1 optional mapping trouble
Hi!
Now, if I update an object that hasn't the 1:1 optional mapping, ojb
hi david,
why don't you use ojbConcreteClass ?
David Corbin wrote:
I have a class heirarchy, and there are 30 different concrete classes in it.
There is NO difference in the data, just in behavior. I'm well aware of how
to read these in from a common table using a RowReader.
Do I have to
On Friday 31 October 2003 14:11, Jakob Braeuchi wrote:
hi david,
why don't you use ojbConcreteClass ?
I don't understand. I fully plan on having something like this so I can
materialize the correct type object. That has little (as far as I can tell)
to do with my problem. As far as I can
hi david,
David Corbin wrote:
On Friday 31 October 2003 14:11, Jakob Braeuchi wrote:
hi david,
why don't you use ojbConcreteClass ?
I don't understand. I fully plan on having something like this so I can
materialize the correct type object. That has little (as far as I can tell)
well
-
From: David Corbin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 2:37 PM
To: OJB Users List; Jakob Braeuchi
Subject: Re: mapping many classes to one table
On Friday 31 October 2003 14:11, Jakob Braeuchi wrote:
hi david,
why don't you use
and Development
919 - 531 - 9425
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
SAS - The Power to Know
-Original Message-
From: David Corbin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 2:37 PM
To: OJB Users List; Jakob Braeuchi
Subject: Re: mapping many classes to one table
On Friday
plum out of them.
JohnE
- Original Message -
From: Robert J Celestino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Friday, October 31, 2003 10:11 am
Subject: RE: Another silly newbie mapping question
Hello John,
I think you want auto-update=true instead of false here:
reference
to Know
-Original Message-
From: David Corbin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 2:37 PM
To: OJB Users List; Jakob Braeuchi
Subject: Re: mapping many classes to one table
On Friday 31 October 2003 14:11, Jakob Braeuchi wrote:
hi
: Jakob Braeuchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 1:48 PM
To: OJB Users List
Subject: Re: mapping many classes to one table
hi,
Robert J Celestino wrote:
David,
I believe that you must write 30 class descriptors all exactly the
same except for the class name :-( I have
Users List
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 3:10 PM
Subject: Re: More 1:0..1 optional mapping trouble
Hi Edson,
could you write a test case/cases showing the problems?
Maybe you could use ReferenceTest in test suite as
starting point.
regards,
Armin
Edson Carlos Ericksson Richter wrote:
Actually
- 9425
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
SAS - The Power to Know
-Original Message-
From: David Corbin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 2:37 PM
To: OJB Users List; Jakob Braeuchi
Subject: Re: mapping many classes to one table
On Friday 31 October 2003 14:11, Jakob
Hello,
-Original Message-
From: Andy Malakov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problem: Right after insert, PersistenceBrokerImpl calls
storeCollections () method that performs redundant DELETE FROM...
operation.
The problem has been mentioned by myself in the developer list
together wit
Hello all,
I am stumped by what is posibly a very simple mapping problem.
Consider something like this
Person is stored in the person table
Person has-a AddressGroup. AddressGroup is not stored in the DB
AddressGroup has a list of Addresses
Address is stored
Message-
From: Robert J Celestino [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 8:14 PM
To: OJB Users List
Subject: o/r mapping question
Hello all,
I am stumped by what is posibly a very simple mapping problem.
Consider something like this
Person is stored in the person
, October 30, 2003, at 09:14 PM, Robert J Celestino wrote:
Hello all,
I am stumped by what is posibly a very simple mapping problem.
Consider something like this
Person is stored in the person table
Person has-a AddressGroup. AddressGroup is not stored in the DB
AddressGroup has
;
}
}
-
The mapping:
class-descriptor class=org.skife.kim.model.User table=USERS
field-descriptor name=id column=ID jdbc-type=INTEGER
primarykey=true autoincrement=true/
field-descriptor name=handle column=HANDLE
jdbc-type=VARCHAR/
field-descriptor name=password column
Hi all,
In my db table i have a tinyint(1) column.
can i map it to a boolean or Boolean attribute in my java bean ?
thank's
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
Yassine Lajmi wrote:
Hi all,
In my db table i have a tinyint(1) column.
can i map it to a boolean or Boolean attribute in my java bean ?
yes, see
http://db.apache.org/ojb/jdbc-types.html
field conversion.
There are many FieldConversion implementations shipped with OJB.
(e.g.
Hello All,
UseCase: PersistenceBroker stores NEW object that has non-decomposed m:n relationship
field.
Problem: Right after insert, PersistenceBrokerImpl calls storeCollections () method
that performs redundant DELETE FROM...
operation.
Solution: It should be possible to pass current
Hi Mitch,
Yes, it would. If you use the mapping variant I suggested, you would
need two queries, one for User.class and one for Driver.class, and
combine the results. If a Person is a User and a Driver, you would get
two objects, but both referring to the same Person object. (In other
words
Hello.
I tried to map multiple inteface inheritance like this:
!-- Interface Preis --
class-descriptor
class=de.sigel.business.mvgl.bo.Preis
extent-class
calss-ref=de.sigel.business.mvgl.bo.MitbewerbervergleichPreis/
extent-class
-User (E-Mail)
Subject: mapping
Hello.
I tried to map multiple inteface inheritance like this:
!-- Interface Preis --
class-descriptor
class=de.sigel.business.mvgl.bo.Preis
extent-class
calss-ref=de.sigel.business.mvgl.bo.MitbewerbervergleichPreis/
extent-class
I'm having some trouble using the PersistenceBroker to perform rollback on an object
mapped with a simple inheritance hierarchy.
Here's how my classes are configured:
public class TNObject
{
private Integer id;
private String comment;
// (setters and getters)
}
public class
I've got a simple 1..n association and I'm doing something like
this...(pardon the syntax... just trying to make a point)
Parent parent = new Parent()
Child c1 = new Child(parent);
Child c2 = new Child(parent);
parent.getChildren.add(c1);
parent.getChildren.add(c2);
broker.store(parent);
In looking at the SQL, and update is done when I do the store.. hey I
think the PK is NOT unique... yup - it's not unique... that's gotta be
the problem...
On Thu, 2003-10-23 at 16:07, Andy Czerwonka wrote:
I've got a simple 1..n association and I'm doing something like
this...(pardon the
doesn't know about B, which declares the Person reference,
you would need to use PersistentFieldIntrospectorImpl as
PersistentField class in OJB.properties. You could also stick to
PersistentFieldDirectAccessImpl, but then you have to explicitly map
class B and use inheritance mapping for User
Hello,
From: oliver . matz
It just seems odd that by removing an item from a collection that it
performs a delete on the object that is in the collection.
This is the behaviour of
org.apache.ojb.broker.util.collections.RemovalAwareCollection,
which is the default collection-class. You can
Hi Gerhard,
I'm not saying the B1 and B2 instances should extend the same instance
of A, but that they should be materialized from the same A record in the
database. B1 and B2 would have to be different objects obviously. I
think this could be quite possible in OJB.
But let me ask the
I know it is possible when A and B1 are mapped to one table. Not sure about
when they are mapped to two tables. I would hope both would work since the
only difference is in the mapping layer.
When they are mapped to one table...
1) Grab the A instance.
2) Create an instance of B1 and copy all
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 09:45:29 -0400, Matt Mastrangelo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Matt,
Hi Gerhard,
I'm not saying the B1 and B2 instances should extend the same instance
of A, but that they should be materialized from the same A record in the
database. B1 and B2 would have to be different
Matt,
Here is what i suggest you do, if this fits your requirments.
In this example Student extends Person and Person has a 1:M relationship
with UserLogin. You can change it to 1:1 relation ship by makeint
UserLogin.personId the PK instead of UserLogin.userLoginId. This way
all people can
know.
Later.
Mitch
-Original Message-
From: Gerhard Grosse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 6:55 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Inheritance mapping, storing new object associated with
pre-existingsuper object
Hi Matt,
Excuse me to jump in here, but I
Grosse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 9:50 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Inheritance mapping, storing new object associated with
pre-e xistingsuper object
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 08:55:02 -0500, Mitch Norby
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Mitch,
How would you model
has anyone been successfully mapping two objects to the same table??
to be more specific, i would like distinct object instances for objectAId and distinct
object instances for objectBId in seperate queries.
select distinct objectA_id from tableAB;
select distinct objectB_id from
?
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,
the main difference is that you use anonymous
I'm trying to figure out how to store a new persisted object that
extends a pre-existing object.
For example, I have 3 classes: Person, Student, and User. Student and
User extend Person. A Student object already exists, and I now want to
create a User object that inherits from the same
Chris,
Just to clarify -- are you saying it's not possible to create the User
instance without also creating a new Person instance? Maybe my example
was not too clear. Let me re-explain:
I have a base class A with two subclasses, B1 and B2. I have already
created an instance of B1 and
how can i make a m:n mapping...? can u pls how???
i have been trying m:n decomposition method...but, the intermediary table is
not persisted any data...
actually, the data is persisted into the intermediary table, but then, it
was deleted..
pls show the way to do it thanks
relations mapping...
how can i make a m:n mapping...? can u pls how???
i have been trying m:n decomposition method...but, the intermediary table
is
not persisted any data...
actually, the data is persisted into the intermediary table, but then, it
was deleted..
pls show the way to do it thanks
13, 2003 8:42 PM
To: OJB Users List
Subject: 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
: 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
: 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
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
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
=)
-Brian
On Tuesday, October 14, 2003, at 08:42 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Brian,
-Original Message-
class-descriptor class=test.User table=USERS
[..]
-- Schema Def'n --
table name=user_friend description=M:N mapping table
for user's friends
[..]
foreign-key
Hej Brian,
-Original Message-
From: Brian McCallister [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have mixed and matched the value, but it hasn't mattered. I had
thought it might care so I tried various combinations. It in
this vase
being a nebulous entity who thwarts my plans, as to my
;
}
public void setLastName(String lastName)
{
this.lastName = lastName;
}
public String getPassword()
{
return password;
}
public void setPassword(String password)
{
this.password = password;
}
}
-
The mapping
Hello Brian,
-Original Message-
From: Brian McCallister [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Which concrete class is instantiated
for the list field?
Default - I don't specify anything so should be a Vector.
I bet this is the problem. You'd probably better
use one of the managed
On Tuesday, October 14, 2003, at 10:29 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I bet this is the problem. You'd probably better
use one of the managed collections. Could you please
check by outputting xxx.getClass().getName() somewhere?
On retrieved collections it uses:
Follow up.. Changing the OTM Test to use PB style QueryByCriteria also
fails:
public void testRequestFriendOTMTwo() throws Exception
{
OTMConnection conn =
SimpleKit.getInstance().acquireConnection(PersistenceBrokerFactory.getDe
faultKey());
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
hello,
i am new to OJB. i hope i can help some helps from here...
my problem is as followed:
i want to make a M:N relational mapping between two tables User and Role. so
my repository-user.xml
is such followed
class-descriptor
class=my.com.shinyang.eply.model.User
table=USERS
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
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
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
I am having problems getting a class to properly persist collections of
instances of the same class (see configs later in the email). Using the
M:N mapping seems to be the way to do this, but it isn't actually
working. If the relations exist in the database the data loads fine,
however
(see configs later in the email). Using
the M:N mapping seems to be the way to do this, but it isn't actually
working. If the relations exist in the database the data loads fine,
however it doesn't seem to want to persist new instances to the M:N
table. I am using the non-decomposed style M:N
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
Hi all,
I would like to report some problems I had to map two sister classes on
the same table, and make sure I am not doing anything wrong. I am using
the ODMG API, OJB RC4 with j2sdk1.4.1_01 on windows, and MySQL 4.
I followed the Advanced O/R tutorial, chapter Mapping all classes
Problem solved! problem with classpath for rc4 - still rc3-jars were active
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi all
i m trying to do a 1:1 mapping on rc4 with the xml file at the end
when i try to store a Catalogue i get this error :
Thanks for ur help
org.apache.ojb.broker.PersistenceBrokerException:
org.apache.ojb.broker.PersistenceBrokerException
.
HTH
Gerhard
Rémi Bars [EMAIL PROTECTED]
30.09.2003 15:25
Bitte antworten an OJB Users List
An: OJB Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kopie:
Thema: 1:1-Mapping
Hi all
i m trying to do a 1:1 mapping on rc4 with the xml file at the end
when i try to store
i only use integer in my repository.xml, and i use int in my classes
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: OJB Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 3:28 PM
Subject: Re: 1:1-Mapping
Have you tried using int, instead of Integer?
- Original
ok thanks it s working now
remi
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: OJB Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 3:47 PM
Subject: Antwort: 1:1-Mapping
The problem is that your field descriptor and reference descriptor have
the same name attributes
Hi all,
up to now, I used complete object for references and all worked fine.
Now I try to use a proxy for a reference (version: rc4). The mapping is:
class-descriptor
class=de.softcon.webcontrol.business.model.OrganisationPO
table=tpartner
field-descriptor name=id column=foid jdbc
Björn Voigt wrote:
If I store the object to database and get it back, the length of
the byte[] is bigger than the original length.
Did you compare the original value and the written one?
May be that gives a hint.
-
To
Christian Pesch schrieb:
Björn Voigt wrote:
If I store the object to database and get it back, the length of
the byte[] is bigger than the original length.
Did you compare the original value and the written one?
May be that gives a hint.
Hi Christian,
here are the sample files I use,
test1.jpg
Hi all,
We are using ODMG Api.
When trying to retrieve a person, who has documents collection (Documents
as an ArrayList), OJB fails saying it needs a
org.apache.ojb.broker.util.collections.RemovalAwareCollection (pls see
error below)
It seems we should use a RemovalAwareCollection, or a
]
cc:
Subject:Problem with 1 to N mapping when retrieving into an ArrayList
with ODMG
API
Hi all,
We are using ODMG Api.
When trying to retrieve a person, who has documents collection (Documents
as an ArrayList), OJB fails saying it needs
301 - 400 of 531 matches
Mail list logo
