Mailing-List: contact dev-help@openjpa.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@openjpa.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of allee8285@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.221.193 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
        b=dLORRzR9gZ2EWe7E8AUlpW6eZXx2UVw3RnBBiJSzhuqc/YBvH35tuMBQ9NnnoatakB
         gFl3gQaiYxvM3DlQbpw4wZXQjBv7zTLnh/NQQqS4Ry3/QVdjVtndzaFJqKpEEyW7sKmf
         rXl+us6KvZXIQlbi1HdI4Fpl+PEB8AL1nYXxw=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2009 15:05:48 -0500
Message-ID: <8e68c8e90909191305g2ae1c293i5953d6ebc87ebac9@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: @JoinTable not honor if "name" attribute is not specified
From: Albert Lee <allee8285@gmail.com>
To: open-jpa-dev <dev@openjpa.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00c09f9059d754bd210473f3c670

--00c09f9059d754bd210473f3c670
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

If the name attribute of @JoinTable is not specified, join table is not
created for entity relationship. E.g.

@Entity public class LockScopeEntity1xm {
    @OneToMany(mappedBy="ownerOne")
    private Collection<LockScopeEntityMany> ownedMany = new
HashSet<LockScopeEntityMany>();

@Entity public class LockScopeEntityMany {
    @JoinTable(name="xxx")
    @ManyToOne
    private LockScopeEntity1xm ownerOne;

If name="xxx" is not specified, the following mapping is created:
CREATE TABLE LockScopeEntity1xm (id INTEGER NOT NULL, version INTEGER,
PRIMARY KEY (id))
CREATE TABLE LockScopeEntityMany (id INTEGER NOT NULL, version INTEGER,
OWNERONE_ID INTEGER, PRIMARY KEY (id))
CREATE INDEX I_LCKSMNY_OWNERONE ON LockScopeEntityMany (OWNERONE_ID)

Otherwise:
CREATE TABLE LockScopeEntity1xm (id INTEGER NOT NULL, version INTEGER,
PRIMARY KEY (id))
CREATE TABLE LockScopeEntityMany (id INTEGER NOT NULL, version INTEGER,
PRIMARY KEY (id))
CREATE TABLE xxx (OWNEDMANY_ID INTEGER, OWNERONE_ID INTEGER)
CREATE INDEX I_XXX_OWNEDMANY_ID ON xxx (OWNEDMANY_ID)
CREATE INDEX I_XXX_OWNERONE ON xxx (OWNERONE_ID)

However the spec spelled out the default in 11.1.23 that:

@Target({METHOD, FIELD}) @Retention(RUNTIME)
public @interface JoinTable {
  String name() default "";
  ...... }

Table 22 JoinTable Annotation Elements
String | name | (Optional) The name of the join table. | Default: The
concatenated names of the two associated primary entity tables (owning side
first), separated by an underscore.

Shouldn't in the case where name="xxx" is not specified the following
mapping should be created?
CREATE TABLE OWNEDMANY_OWNERONE (OWNEDMANY_ID INTEGER, OWNERONE_ID INTEGER)

The setting of the join table name is in AnnotationPersisteneMappingParser

    private void parseJoinTable(FieldMapping fm, JoinTable join) {
        FieldMappingInfo info = fm.getMappingInfo();
        info.setTableName(toTableName(join.schema(), join.name()));

    private static String toTableName(String schema, String table) {
        if (StringUtils.isEmpty(table))
            return null;
        if (StringUtils.isEmpty(schema))
            return table;
        return schema + "." + table;
    }

If name is not specified, info.setTableName is set to null, that means no
join table is used.

Is this interpretation is correct?
-- 
Albert Lee.

--00c09f9059d754bd210473f3c670--