Hey Patrick,
I am facing this problem.
Consider this..similar like your example.
Entity Inventory{
- List<@Item> items
}
Entity Item{
}
This generates an additional table INVENTORY_ITEM which I dont want (many-2-many relationship.)
I want to have unidiretional relationship(one-2-many) as only inventory can have items.
Now If I do the following
CASE:1
Entity Inventory{
- List<@Item> items inverse
}
I see a reference of INVENTORY in item table which is not expected.
CREATE TABLE ITEM (
ITEM_ID NUMBER(20) NOT NULL,
INVENTORY NUMBER(20) ,
);
What I want to have is just below and there should no reference of Inventory in Item table.
CREATE TABLE INVENTORY (
INVENTORY_ID NUMBER(20) NOT NULL,
ITEM_ID NUMBER(20) NOT NULL,
)
CASE 2:
I did the following(Not sure why but I read somewhere that inverse creates a reference in the child table)
As such the following doesnt look correct to me but still I tried
Entity Inventory{
}
Entity Item{
- List<@Inventory> inv inverse
}
It does this which seems okk...although it creates this INV_INDEX(INTEGER) which I'll have to fix somehow to make NUMBER
CREATE TABLE INVENTORY (
INVENTORY_ID NUMBER(20) NOT NULL,
INV_INDEX INTEGER(10),
ITEM NUMBER(20)
);
This is fine so far....but in Item.hbm.xml I see
<list name="inv">
<key column="ITEM"/>
<index column="INV_INDEX"/>
<one-to-many class="com.bookonz.inventory.domain.Inventory"/>
</list>
I am not sure if this is correct? Should Item.hbm hold a reference to Inventory?
Please provide your inputs on this.
Thanks,
Deepak.
Do you need something like this, i.e. Moon doesn't refer back to Planet?
Entity Planet {
- @Set<Moon> moons
}
Entity Moon {
}
This will result in a uni-directional many association, but will be implemented in the database as many-to-many.
To implement it with an ordinary foreign key in the child table you have to add inverse
Entity Planet {
- @Set<Moon> moons inverse
}
Doc: http://www.fornax-platform.org/cp/display/fornax/3.+Advanced+Tutorial+(CSC)#3.AdvancedTutorial(CSC)-AdditionalReferenceFeatures
/Patrik
polly.c.chang wrote:
Hi,
Is it possible to map a uni-directional one-to-many mapping? From looking at the documentation and template code, it looks like one has to mark the Reference as "inverse", which is a bi-directional mapping. I just want to have a simple uni-directional mapping.
Thanks!
--Polly
