I have table Animal with OneToMany mapping to table EventAnimal:
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "animal")
public Set<EventAnimal> getEventAnimals() {
return eventAnimals;
}
Table EventAnimal looks like this
#Entity
#Table(name = "eventAnimal")
public class EventAnimal {
#Id
int id;
#ManyToOne(cascade = CascadeType.ALL)
#JoinColumn(name = "userEvent_id")
UserEvent userEvent;
#ManyToOne(cascade = CascadeType.ALL)
#JoinColumn(name = "animal_id", nullable=false)
Animal animal;
#ManyToOne(cascade = CascadeType.ALL)
#JoinColumn(name = "eventAnimalClass_id")
EventAnimalClass eventAnimalClass;
}
When I add Event animal to animal and save animal, database is not being updated:
//Create EventAnimal object, set properties
eventAnimal.setUserEvent(newEvent);
eventAnimal.setAnimal(animal);
animal.getEventAnimals().add(eventAnimal);
animalPersistenceService.saveAnimal(animal);
What am I doing wrong?
When I try inserting Event animal, like eventAnimalDao.insert(eventAnimal);
instead of
animalPersistenceService.saveAnimal(animal);
I get exception that "animal_id" does not have default value even though I set it.
What is your ID generation strategy? Are you generating the ids by yourself or you will leave this to the DB? If it will be database put:
#GeneratedValue(strategy=GenerationType.AUTO)
You may want to update the key to Integer instead of int too but don`t think this is the problem.
Also if you want to add event in animal and expect to persist it update your mapping to:
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "animal", cascade = CascadeType.ALL)
I have table Company with OneToMany mapping to table Customer:
//bi-directional many-to-one association to Customer
#OneToMany(mappedBy="company")
private Set<Customer> customer;
I have mapped from tis format:
//bi-directional many-to-one association to Company
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name="company_id")
private Company company;
I have use this code, Sucessfully add,edit and delete function is working.
Add function :
Customer customer = new Customer();
Company company = new Company();
company.setCompanyId(intCompanyId);
customer.setCompany(company);
I resolved the problem. It was rather silly mistake - script didn't remove one foreign key from table and I didn't care to look into SQL table.
Related
I have 3 sql tables:
Account (ID (BIGINT),...)
Card (ID (BIGINT),...)
RelationAccountCard (ACCOUNT (BIGINT), CARD(BIGINT), QUANTITY(int))
One account can have multiple cards, one card can have multiple account
#Data
#Entity
public class Account {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO)
private long id;
#ManyToMany
#JoinTable(
name = "RELATION_ACCOUNT_CARD",
joinColumns = #JoinColumn(name = "ACCOUNT"),
inverseJoinColumns = #JoinColumn(name = "CARD"))
private Set<Card> cardsOwned = new HashSet<>();
}
#Data
#Entity
public class Card {
#Id
private long id;
#JsonIgnore
#ManyToMany(mappedBy = "cardsOwned")
private java.util.Set<Account> accounts;
}
This code above is working if the field "QUANTITY" in relationAccountCard didn't exist. I would like to make the code works knowing that I added the "QUANTITY" field. I tried for hours yesterday without success, do you have an idea of how to do this?
Basically I need to replace private Set<Card> cardsOwned; by private Set<RelationAccountCard> relationAccountCards; but I don't know how to
The solution was to delete the composite primary key. To make (card,account) unique, and to add an ID.
Once it was done, I simply followed the answer of this stackoverflow post:
Mapping many-to-many association table with extra column(s)
Posting this here as I wasn't seeing much interest here: http://www.java-forums.org/jpa/96175-openjpa-one-many-within-one-many-merge-problems.html
Trying to figure out if this is a problem with OpenJPA or something I may be doing wrong...
I'm facing a problem when trying to use OpenJPA to update an Entity that contains a One to Many relationship to another Entity, that has a One to Many relationship to another. Here's a quick example of what I'm talking about:
#Entity
#Table(name = "school")
public class School {
#Column(name = "id")
protected Long id;
#Column(name = "name")
protected String name;
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "school", orphanRemoval = true, cascade = CascadeType.ALL)
protected Collection<ClassRoom> classRooms;
}
#Entity
#Table(name = "classroom")
public class ClassRoom {
#Column(name = "id")
protected Long id;
#Column(name = "room_number")
protected String roomNumber;
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "school_id")
protected School school;
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "classRoom", orphanRemoval = true, cascade = CascadeType.ALL, fetch = FetchType.EAGER)
protected Collection<Desk> desks;
}
#Entity
#Table(name = "desk")
public class Desk {
#Column(name = "id")
protected Long id;
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "classroom_id")
protected ClassRoom classRoom;
}
In the SchoolService class, I have the following update method:
#Transactional
public void update(School school) {
em.merge(school);
}
I'm trying to remove a Class Room from the School. I remove it from the classRooms collection and call update. I'm noticing if the Class Room has no desks, there are no issues. But if the Class Room has desks, it throws a constraint error as it seems to try to delete the Class Room first, then the Desks. (There is a foreign key constraint for the classroom_id column)
Am I going about this the wrong way? Is there some setting I'm missing to get it to delete the interior "Desk" instances first before deleting the Class Room instance that was removed?
Any help would be appreciated. If you need any more info, please just let me know.
Thanks,
There are various bug reports around FK violations in OpenJPA when cascading remove operations to child entities:
The OpenJPA FAQ notes that the following:
http://openjpa.apache.org/faq.html#reorder
Can OpenJPA reorder SQL statements to satisfy database foreign key
constraints?
Yes. OpenJPA can reorder and/or batch the SQL statements using
different configurable strategies. The default strategy is capable of
reordering the SQL statements to satisfy foreign key constraints.
However ,you must tell OpenJPA to read the existing foreign key
information from the database schema:
It would seem you can force the correct ordering of the statements by either setting the following property in your OpenJPA config
<property name="openjpa.jdbc.SchemaFactory"> value="native(ForeignKeys=true)"/>
or by adding the org.apache.openjpa.persistence.jdbc.ForeignKey annotation to the mapping:
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "classRoom", orphanRemoval = true, cascade = CascadeType.ALL, fetch = FetchType.EAGER)
#org.apache.openjpa.persistence.jdbc.ForeignKey
protected Collection<Desk> desks;
See also:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-1936
I have a class Customer that has a OneToOne bidirectional relationship with a Subscription:
#Entity
#Table(name = "customers")
public class Customer{
#OneToOne(mappedBy="customer",cascade = CascadeType.ALL)
private Subscription currentSubscription;
}
#Entity
#Table(name = "subscriptions")
public class Subscription {
#Id
#Column(columnDefinition = "INT8",name="id", unique=true, nullable=false)
#GeneratedValue(generator="gen")
#GenericGenerator(name="gen", strategy="foreign", parameters=#Parameter(name="property", value="customer"))
private Long id;
#OneToOne
#PrimaryKeyJoinColumn
private Customer customer;
}
Now, when I create a customer with a subscription and call persist on the customer, it nicely saves the subscription as well into the database. However when I have already persisted a customer, and want to add a subscription, it fails with the following error:
Caused by: org.hibernate.id.IdentifierGenerationException: attempted
to assign id from null one-to-one property
[com.qmino.miredot.portal.domain.Subscription.customer]
I've written a test in order to explain what I want to achieve:
#Test
public void shouldCascadeUpdateSubscription(){
Customer owner = customerRepository.save(CustomerMother.getCustomer(false));
Subscription subscription = SubscriptionBuilder.create()
.setBillingDayOfMonth(LocalDate.now().getDayOfMonth())
.setSubscriptionPlan(subscriptionPlan)
.build();
subscription.setCustomer(owner);
owner.setCurrentSubscription(subscription);
customerRepository.save(owner);
Customer result = customerRepository.findOne(owner.getId());
assertThat(result.getCurrentSubscription(),is(notNullValue()));
assertThat(result.getCurrentSubscription().getId(),is(result.getId()));
}
Where did I go wrong?
Cascade here is not the problem, Cascade indicates the action to be done by entity when deleted or updated. What is correct if you want to save complete entity. But for that, you need to have the correct data, your message suggest it tries to update the Customer entity but it founds an empty AccountDetails, so in order to correctly fetch the other entities, you need to add FecthType.EAGER, to get all attributes of mapped entities.
#OneToOne(mappedBy="customer",cascade = CascadeType.ALL, fetch = FetchType.EAGER))
I am trying to get the following type of mapping to work
Table event has the following columns:
id (PK)
prodgroup
errandtype
table errandtype : errandtype
table prodgroup: prodgroup
I have corresponding JPA classes
#Entity
#Table(name="event")
public class MyEvent {
#Id
int id;
// what mapping should go here?
Prodgroup prodgroup;
// what mapping should go here?
ErrandType errandtype;
}
#Entity
public class Prodgroup {
#Id
private String prodgroup;
}
#Entity
public class ErrandType {
#Id
private String errandtype;
}
Ok so questions are marked as comments in the code but I'll try to be explicit anyway.
In the above example I want my Prodgroup and ErrandType fields in the MyEvent class to be set to corresponding Prodgroup and Errandtype instances
I have tried #OneToOne relationships with #joincolumns and with mappedby attribute, but I just can't get it working and I've lost all sense of logical approach. My grasp of JPA entity mapping is clearly weak.
So can anyone bring some clarity?
It should be:
#Entity
#Table(name="event")
public class MyEvent {
#Id
int id;
// what mapping should go here?
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.EAGER, cascade = CascadeType.ALL)
#JoinColumn(name = "prodgroup_id", insertable = true, updatable = true)
Prodgroup prodgroup;
// what mapping should go here?
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.EAGER, cascade = CascadeType.ALL)
#JoinColumn(name = "errandtype_id", insertable = true, updatable = true)
ErrandType errandtype;
}
#Entity
public class Prodgroup {
#Id
private String prodgroup;
}
#Entity
public class ErrandType {
#Id
private String errandtype;
}
FetchType Eager means the object will be always loaded (would be "Lazy" by default if not specified).
CascadeType.ALL means mearge/persist/remove will be also done to linked tables.
Sebastian
Your table columns event.prodgroup and event.errandtype are foreign keys to respective tables (prodgroup, errandtype). So you need #ManyToOne association (because many events may share one prodgroup or errantype).
In which case do you use the JPA #JoinTable annotation?
EDIT 2017-04-29: As pointed to by some of the commenters, the JoinTable example does not need the mappedBy annotation attribute. In fact, recent versions of Hibernate refuse to start up by printing the following error:
org.hibernate.AnnotationException:
Associations marked as mappedBy must not define database mappings
like #JoinTable or #JoinColumn
Let's pretend that you have an entity named Project and another entity named Task and each project can have many tasks.
You can design the database schema for this scenario in two ways.
The first solution is to create a table named Project and another table named Task and add a foreign key column to the task table named project_id:
Project Task
------- ----
id id
name name
project_id
This way, it will be possible to determine the project for each row in the task table. If you use this approach, in your entity classes you won't need a join table:
#Entity
public class Project {
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "project")
private Collection<Task> tasks;
}
#Entity
public class Task {
#ManyToOne
private Project project;
}
The other solution is to use a third table, e.g. Project_Tasks, and store the relationship between projects and tasks in that table:
Project Task Project_Tasks
------- ---- -------------
id id project_id
name name task_id
The Project_Tasks table is called a "Join Table". To implement this second solution in JPA you need to use the #JoinTable annotation. For example, in order to implement a uni-directional one-to-many association, we can define our entities as such:
Project entity:
#Entity
public class Project {
#Id
#GeneratedValue
private Long pid;
private String name;
#JoinTable
#OneToMany
private List<Task> tasks;
public Long getPid() {
return pid;
}
public void setPid(Long pid) {
this.pid = pid;
}
public String getName() {
return name;
}
public void setName(String name) {
this.name = name;
}
public List<Task> getTasks() {
return tasks;
}
public void setTasks(List<Task> tasks) {
this.tasks = tasks;
}
}
Task entity:
#Entity
public class Task {
#Id
#GeneratedValue
private Long tid;
private String name;
public Long getTid() {
return tid;
}
public void setTid(Long tid) {
this.tid = tid;
}
public String getName() {
return name;
}
public void setName(String name) {
this.name = name;
}
}
This will create the following database structure:
The #JoinTable annotation also lets you customize various aspects of the join table. For example, had we annotated the tasks property like this:
#JoinTable(
name = "MY_JT",
joinColumns = #JoinColumn(
name = "PROJ_ID",
referencedColumnName = "PID"
),
inverseJoinColumns = #JoinColumn(
name = "TASK_ID",
referencedColumnName = "TID"
)
)
#OneToMany
private List<Task> tasks;
The resulting database would have become:
Finally, if you want to create a schema for a many-to-many association, using a join table is the only available solution.
#ManyToMany associations
Most often, you will need to use #JoinTable annotation to specify the mapping of a many-to-many table relationship:
the name of the link table and
the two Foreign Key columns
So, assuming you have the following database tables:
In the Post entity, you would map this relationship, like this:
#ManyToMany(cascade = {
CascadeType.PERSIST,
CascadeType.MERGE
})
#JoinTable(
name = "post_tag",
joinColumns = #JoinColumn(name = "post_id"),
inverseJoinColumns = #JoinColumn(name = "tag_id")
)
private List<Tag> tags = new ArrayList<>();
The #JoinTable annotation is used to specify the table name via the name attribute, as well as the Foreign Key column that references the post table (e.g., joinColumns) and the Foreign Key column in the post_tag link table that references the Tag entity via the inverseJoinColumns attribute.
Notice that the cascade attribute of the #ManyToMany annotation is set to PERSIST and MERGE only because cascading REMOVE is a bad idea since we the DELETE statement will be issued for the other parent record, tag in our case, not to the post_tag record.
Unidirectional #OneToMany associations
The unidirectional #OneToMany associations, that lack a #JoinColumn mapping, behave like many-to-many table relationships, rather than one-to-many.
So, assuming you have the following entity mappings:
#Entity(name = "Post")
#Table(name = "post")
public class Post {
#Id
#GeneratedValue
private Long id;
private String title;
#OneToMany(
cascade = CascadeType.ALL,
orphanRemoval = true
)
private List<PostComment> comments = new ArrayList<>();
//Constructors, getters and setters removed for brevity
}
#Entity(name = "PostComment")
#Table(name = "post_comment")
public class PostComment {
#Id
#GeneratedValue
private Long id;
private String review;
//Constructors, getters and setters removed for brevity
}
Hibernate will assume the following database schema for the above entity mapping:
As already explained, the unidirectional #OneToMany JPA mapping behaves like a many-to-many association.
To customize the link table, you can also use the #JoinTable annotation:
#OneToMany(
cascade = CascadeType.ALL,
orphanRemoval = true
)
#JoinTable(
name = "post_comment_ref",
joinColumns = #JoinColumn(name = "post_id"),
inverseJoinColumns = #JoinColumn(name = "post_comment_id")
)
private List<PostComment> comments = new ArrayList<>();
And now, the link table is going to be called post_comment_ref and the Foreign Key columns will be post_id, for the post table, and post_comment_id, for the post_comment table.
Unidirectional #OneToMany associations are not efficient, so you are better off using bidirectional #OneToMany associations or just the #ManyToOne side.
It's the only solution to map a ManyToMany association : you need a join table between the two entities tables to map the association.
It's also used for OneToMany (usually unidirectional) associations when you don't want to add a foreign key in the table of the many side and thus keep it independent of the one side.
Search for #JoinTable in the hibernate documentation for explanations and examples.
It's also cleaner to use #JoinTable when an Entity could be the child in several parent/child relationships with different types of parents. To follow up with Behrang's example, imagine a Task can be the child of Project, Person, Department, Study, and Process.
Should the task table have 5 nullable foreign key fields? I think not...
It lets you handle Many to Many relationship. Example:
Table 1: post
post has following columns
____________________
| ID | DATE |
|_________|_________|
| | |
|_________|_________|
Table 2: user
user has the following columns:
____________________
| ID |NAME |
|_________|_________|
| | |
|_________|_________|
Join Table lets you create a mapping using:
#JoinTable(
name="USER_POST",
joinColumns=#JoinColumn(name="USER_ID", referencedColumnName="ID"),
inverseJoinColumns=#JoinColumn(name="POST_ID", referencedColumnName="ID"))
will create a table:
____________________
| USER_ID| POST_ID |
|_________|_________|
| | |
|_________|_________|