Re: CAY-1378, CAY-1009...

From: Andrey Razumovsky (razumovsky.andre..mail.com)
Date: Sun Feb 07 2010 - 10:36:32 EST

  • Next message: Andrey Razumovsky: "Re: CAY-1378, CAY-1009..."

    As far as i remember, the problem is if we have a mapping:
    entities:
    A
    B extends A - mapped in same db table
    C

    dbRel:
    toA, cArray (from C to A and vice versa) - Is Mandatory

    objRel - toA, cArray (from C to A and vice versa)

    So, there's isn't any ObjRel from B to C and therefore Cayenne adds runtime
    relationship.
    Problems come when we're setting relationship via C.setToA(..) and commit.
    Cayenne thinks runtime rel from C to B is mandatory (after all, it's mapped
    to mandatory dbRel) and fails to commit.
    Not sure why I haven't added test maps when committing, maybe I haven't
    managed to create one.
    We need to investigate this futher, so please hold on reverting the patch

    2010/2/7 Andrus Adamchik <andru..bjectstyle.org>

    > Actually Bryan's case seems to be pretty clear. I will try to create a test
    > case for it now:
    >
    > We have a source entity with two to-one relationships to target entities
    >> that both inherit from the same table. When we try to insert a new instance
    >> of the source entity, we get:
    >>
    >> org.apache.cayenne.CayenneRuntimeException:
    >> Error resolving to-one fault. More than one object found. Source Id:
    >> <ObjectId:Claim, CLAIM_ID=8891>, relationship: runtimeRelationship0
    >> org.apache.cayenne.access.ToOneFault.doResolveFault(ToOneFault.java:90)
    >> org.apache.cayenne.access.ToOneFault.resolveFault(ToOneFault.java:54)
    >>
    >> Cayenne found two objects in the table and thought it was an error.
    >>
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > On Feb 7, 2010, at 5:18 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
    >
    > Guys, we need to do something about CAY-1009. The fix doesn't look logical
    >> to me, and now it turns out that it breaks other things per CAY-1378.
    >>
    >> I am looking at commented out test case InheritanceTest.testCAY1009() that
    >> Kevin created, and from what I can tell, Cayenne does the right thing here
    >> (without the CAY-1009 fix). I.e. DirectToSubEntity.subEntities is NOT a
    >> reverse relationship of BaseEntity.toDirectToSubEntity, so we should not
    >> expect it to behave as one.
    >>
    >> Bryan and Andrey also had problems with "runtime" relationships. So could
    >> you create test cases for those so we can maybe try looking for the another
    >> cause is elsewhere? Or maybe you could provide a failing mapping and
    >> describe the problem?
    >>
    >> Andrus
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Begin forwarded message:
    >>
    >>> Andrus Adamchik updated CAY-1378:
    >>> ---------------------------------
    >>>
    >>> Attachment: 0001-CAY-1378-no-reverse-for-inheritance.patch
    >>>
    >>> I tend to agree with Victor. Here is my patch reverting CAY-1009 commit
    >>> (plus some minor loop refactoring). This fails uncommented InheritanceTest,
    >>> but I think the test is wrong. I won't commit this yet, and will take
    >>> further discussion to the dev list.
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >

    -- 
    Andrey
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sun Feb 07 2010 - 10:37:21 EST