RE: CMP 2.0 OR mapping problem

2001-02-23 Thread Michael A Third
ssage- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Magnus Rydin Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 9:49 AM To: Orion-Interest Subject: SV: CMP 2.0 OR mapping problem Please remember that the EJB 2.0 spec is not yet released. Although the Orion Team has always be known to be fa

RE: CMP 2.0 OR mapping problem

2001-02-23 Thread Jim Archer
] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jeff Schnitzer > Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 8:18 PM > To: Orion-Interest > Subject: RE: CMP 2.0 OR mapping problem > > > Bidirectional relationships do not yet work. > > There are two workarounds that have worked for me: &g

SV: CMP 2.0 OR mapping problem

2001-02-23 Thread Magnus Rydin
Title: SV: CMP 2.0 OR mapping problem Please remember that the EJB 2.0 spec is not yet released. Although the Orion Team has always be known to be fast to implement early specifications, this is a costly arrangement as specifications change. Personally I hope that EJB 2.0 relations will

RE: CMP 2.0 OR mapping problem

2001-02-23 Thread Michael A Third
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jeff Schnitzer Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 8:18 PM To: Orion-Interest Subject: RE: CMP 2.0 OR mapping problem Bidirectional relationships do not yet work. There are two workarounds that have worked for me

RE: CMP 2.0 OR mapping problem

2001-02-22 Thread Jeff Schnitzer
StorefrontHome. Then you just need to make sure that the storefronts->marketplace reference is kept solid. Jeff >-Original Message- >From: Michael A Third [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 3:37 PM >To: Orion-Interest >Subject: CMP 2.0 OR mapp

CMP 2.0 OR mapping problem

2001-02-22 Thread Michael A Third
I have been trying to get Orion to correctly map a non-dependant bidirectional 1:N relationship using EJB 2.0. It tries to generate a collection mapping that uses a third table to hold the reference. I was able to deploy it properly using a unidirectional relationship. Here is the relevant entr