On Mar 20, 2009, at 1:56 PM, Chuck Hill wrote:


On Mar 20, 2009, at 12:42 PM, TW wrote:
On Mar 20, 2009, at 11:58 AM, Chuck Hill wrote:
On Mar 20, 2009, at 11:49 AM, TW wrote:
On Mar 20, 2009, at 7:31 AM, Chuck Hill wrote:
On Mar 19, 2009, at 11:38 PM, TW wrote:

All:

I have an entity called "Paper" in a new model A that I would like to relate to an entity "Employee" in an established model B. Each of them are in their own framework project but both models use the same database. I was hoping to make this a many to many and flatten it. I've tried many things tonight to get this to work but apparently I'm doing all the wrong things.

Apple's documentation seems to indicate that I should be able to resolve type references to any models included in the model group. I've added B eomodel to the model group section in my EOGenerate file.

I've tried adding B.framework the build path of A.framework. This seems to do the right things and add the join table, etc., but then model B can't resolve type references to the entity in model A. I'm assuming I'm just really confused about how this should work but I've reached my limit for banging my head against it.

I'd be really grateful if anyone doing something similar could share how they may have gotten this working.


It sounds like you have a circular dependancy: Framework A depends on Framework B _and_ Framework B depends on Framework A. That just won't work in Java. I think you can only do this if the relationships are only in one direction or if both models are in the same project.


Chuck


Thanks Chuck. I actually did avoid that happening since I've only added the existing framework to the new framework (and not the reverse). The problem I see on my end is that everything seems to work - relationship add, flattening, etc., but then when I clean everything the older framework does not retain visibility to the types in the newer one.

What you are writing does not seem to be consistent. If you "added the existing framework to the new framework" then it does not make sense to expect "the older framework to retain visibility to the types in the newer one". The new can see the existing, not vice versa. Maybe if you describe the problem in specifics with the real names that may help to clarify things.

I think that's exactly right. I think I had an expectation that wasn't reasonable. :-) The real problem is a can of worms. I work for a professional school at UCLA - a campus whose technology is highly decentralized. So, one model represents Employee data (what I was calling 'B') that I pull from central campus daily. Locally, here in our school, we also have an ldap directory, completely separate from anything central campus holds. It is specific to our school only. These data sources are both modeled and have their own frameworks. I have married them programmatically with manual fetches (LDAPPerson <-> Employee) for login to my most important app - a timesheet app. This all works great but is highly inflexible for new apps - which brings me to where I am. My latest app is for faculty to login only. Believe it or not, the campus Employee data does not have any fields that specify the "type" of user. But our local ldap directory does. That's problem one.

The faculty project is about their "Papers." So, I wanted to relate Papers <<->> Employee. A Paper could have multiple faculty contributors and a faculty person could have multiple papers. Also, I wanted a new model (same database) for this faculty project because it doesn't need to know about timesheet stuff. So, I built that model (what I was calling 'A') and I was trying to build a relationship to the Employee data in 'B'. Since the many to many requires the Employee entity to maintain pointers back, it isn't working. But the truth is, for this project I'm only interested in faculty - something Employee doesn't even know about.

can of worms.

I think I have a problem with approach. I think the best approach may be to sub-class my user types in a third framework? I've been putting this off. :-)


I am really not sure what you are doing and what you are seeing so it is hard to advise you on the best direction to take.

I understand why the approach I was taking won't work. So, maybe you can vet the one I'm trying today. I was thinking I need to create a framework to relate LDAPPerson and Employee in a single framework and create new model there with GenericUser. This GenericUser would then wrap both their ldap source and their employee data source in a single entity and hold that relationship. It sounds like a lot of overhead but maybe the right thing to do. Then I could subclass that user into FacultyPerson, StaffPerson, StudentPerson, etc. , maybe even in separate frameworks. This sounds like it could put me in a better position to achieve what I want.


I think that is exactly the right thing to do: create an object to wrap and hide the complexity of the ldap source and the employee data source.

Chuck

Thanks Chuck. I've made some progress on this today. One place I'm apparently getting stuck is putting valid qualifiers in my model for my inheritance structure. I've got a new abstract entity LDAPEmployee which inherits from InetOrgPerson (from my ldap schema). I added a relationship "employee" between this entity and my Employee entity in my employee source using the the common employeeNumber. So far so good. However, I want to put a qualifier on LDAPEmployee that requires an Employee entity to exist. My hope is to be able to ask for LDAPEmployee objects and only get ldapusers where there's also a related Employee.

So, I created a restricting qualifier in Entity Modeler that looks like:

employee!=null

I get an error that there's a failure to parse my qualifier. Is this because the syntax is bad or because I can't create a qualifier like this? I've looked everywhere for definitive information about what is valid for these qualifiers and there's very little info out there.

Tim
UCLA GSE&IS
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list      (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com

Reply via email to