Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cayenne-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 54311 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2010 13:02:17 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 10 Feb 2010 13:02:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 10017 invoked by uid 500); 10 Feb 2010 13:02:17 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cayenne-dev-archive@cayenne.apache.org Received: (qmail 9970 invoked by uid 500); 10 Feb 2010 13:02:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cayenne.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@cayenne.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cayenne.apache.org Received: (qmail 9960 invoked by uid 99); 10 Feb 2010 13:02:17 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 10 Feb 2010 13:02:17 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [208.78.103.231] (HELO vorsha.objectstyle.org) (208.78.103.231) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Wed, 10 Feb 2010 13:02:10 +0000 Received: (qmail 3000 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2010 13:01:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?IPv6:::1?) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 10 Feb 2010 13:01:50 -0000 Message-Id: <9273B16E-A46E-4787-A4AA-CD8CE6414CB8@objectstyle.org> From: Andrus Adamchik To: dev@cayenne.apache.org In-Reply-To: <7e3605161002100444y38af3fe6q2a68879bce201acf@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Subject: Re: CAY-1378, CAY-1009... Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 15:01:48 +0200 References: <870543083.108061265555428038.JavaMail.jira@brutus.apache.org> <107FBFF4-C391-418A-9A7F-30C823C6DE2E@objectstyle.org> <3219fff71002070736g5a5d5a55r162e3c82000e8c7b@mail.gmail.com> <903C0F62-DE42-4017-BDD3-3CF7AB1DBAAB@objectstyle.org> <3219fff71002090411j1adc3af4x912bcb289dc1538a@mail.gmail.com> <1DC333D2-E700-4BDD-A562-62DF02BC15B4@objectstyle.org> <7e3605161002100444y38af3fe6q2a68879bce201acf@mail.gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) On Feb 10, 2010, at 2:44 PM, Kevin Menard wrote: > I mapped the relationship for the one subclass that > needed it because it was the only one that needed it. While I could > have mapped it at the superclass level, all other siblings would then > have the method, which would be logically invalid. This all sounds correct and this works as far as I can tell. The only way I can reproduce the problem is if there is a user-mapped, not runtime, reverse relationship connected to a superclass, while the forward relationship is connected to a subclass (or vice versa). I.e. (A -> C ; C -> B) is a bad combination, but just (C -> B) without an explicit (A -> C) works ok. I.e. runtime relationships help you avoid reverse relationships, unless an incorrect cross-hierarchy mapping is present. Andrus