I am +0 on this feature. Maybe you are right and the users should
have an opportunity to mess up the object graph in this case.... :-)
Would you mind logging a Jira issue? And let's see what other Cayenne
developers say on that.
Thanks
Andrus
On Jun 8, 2007, at 10:25 AM, Dave Merrin wrote:
> Hi Andrus,
>
> I had seen this as being a problem but not one that I really cared
> about. The main functionality I was after was being able to
> generate classes and have them mapped through to database tables.
> I've got a fair bit of code using cayenne already which I wanted to
> use again. It would be good if Cayenne had some options which
> allowed for no primary keys but made you aware you would lose some
> functionality.
>
> As mentioned before I've got round the problem for this project but
> next time it might not be so easy.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave
>
> Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>>
>> Hi Craig,
>>
>> I can probably implement this in Cayenne in about 30 minutes, as
>> Cayenne has a notion of "temporary id" (normally used for new
>> uncommitted objects). The problem of course is uniquing. So say if
>> a DB row is fetched from a table via a query, resulting in object
>> A, and then later the same row is navigated to via a relationship
>> from another object, resulting in a second object B, distinct from
>> A. This breaks the fundamental assumption about object identity.
>> So we chose not to go this way.
>>
>> Andrus
>>
>>
>> On Jun 8, 2007, at 7:01 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:
>>
>>> Just FYI, when JDO reads data from tables without PK, it
>>> internally creates a unique id, similar to a generated PK, for
>>> the objects that it reads and these ids are discarded when no
>>> longer needed. The fact that the mapping is for tables without PK
>>> is known by the code that creates the temporary ids.
>>>
>>> Craig
>>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Fri Jun 08 2007 - 06:12:02 EDT