I was getting verification exceptions (note: "was"; I don't any more)
referring to "runtimeRelationship0", which I think is what you meant
by auto-reverse relationships. I had these in two different cases.
The initial case was the m:n mapping. In the meantime I don't think it
has specifically to do with m:n mappings either. The two object
entities involved in said mapping are subclasses, so I think it had to
do with inheritance, which is what CAY-1009 seems to be about. I fixed
this one by removing the "mandatory" option on the appropriate
attribute, as suggested in CAY-1009.
The second case was another use of inheritance. It went away after I
went with the modeller through the entire inheritance tree and removed
relationships which weren't relevant from the root class. I think that
was my ignorance. The difficulty that I had was in working out what
"runtimeRelationship0" referred to. It would be more helpful for the
naive and the ignorant like me if the exception text referred to the
"auto-reverse relationship of X".
I'm conscious that this won't help you much and that I am something of
a bull in a china-shop at the moment. But the more I use Cayenne, the
more I like it. And I appreciate your support, which I find exemplary.
Steve
On 8 Feb 2009, at 14:41, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> I am not 100% sure your problem is related to CAY-1009. IIRC
> CAY-1009 describes a very special case that did not work. In most
> cases n:m relationships work just fine. So can you describe your
> problems in more detail? Anything special in your mapping that makes
> you think it is the same problem as CAY-1009?
>
> Andrus
>
>
> On Feb 8, 2009, at 3:03 AM, Stephen Winnall wrote:
>
>> I've got this error again in another part of my schema. Since I
>> don't really understand what the cause is, I go through the
>> attributes of the DB entity switching off the "mandatory" option
>> and seeing if the problem goes away. Is there an easier way to
>> recognise which attribute is causing the problem? Is it a problem
>> with the DB entity or with the object entity?
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> On 4 Feb 2009, at 09:42, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, the issues with auto-reverse relationships need to be fixed
>>> rather sooner than later, and to the best of my knowledge nobody
>>> is working on it right now. But this is certainly high on the list.
>>>
>>> Andrus
>>>
>>> On Feb 3, 2009, at 11:39 PM, Stephen Winnall wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is CAY-1009 (Bogus runtime relationships can mess up commit) due
>>>> for resolution any time soon? I think I've run into it whilst
>>>> modelling an m:n relationship. The work-around (making the
>>>> attributes in the intersect entity non-mandatory) works, but it
>>>> would be nice to do it properly.
>>>>
>>>> Steve
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sun Feb 08 2009 - 09:35:45 EST