cayenne-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen Winnall <>
Subject Re: problem with m:n relationship/inheritance
Date Sun, 08 Feb 2009 14:34:49 GMT
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.


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

View raw message