Search Results

Search found 1488 results on 60 pages for 'kohana orm'.

Page 26/60 | < Previous Page | 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33  | Next Page >

  • Where clause in Fluent NHibernate Many-to-Many

    - by Adam Albrecht
    I am trying to setup a many-to-many mapping in Fluent Nhibernate that has a where clause attached to the child table. This is basically how it should work: HasManyToMany(p => p.Images) .Table("ProductImages") .ParentKeyColumn("ProductID") .ChildKeyColumn("ImageID") .Where("ImageTypeID = 2"); The ImageTypeID column is in the Images table, but NHibernate is assuming it is part of the ProductImages table. Any idea how I can specify this? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Does Hibernate support one-to-one associations as pkeys?

    - by Andrzej Doyle
    Hi all, Can anyone tell me whether Hibernate supports associations as the pkey of an entity? I thought that this would be supported but I am having a lot of trouble getting any kind of mapping that represents this to work. In particular, with the straight mapping below: @Entity public class EntityBar { @Id @OneToOne(optional = false, mappedBy = "bar") EntityFoo foo // other stuff } I get an org.hibernate.MappingException: "Could not determine type for: EntityFoo, at table: ENTITY_BAR, for columns: [org.hibernate.mapping.Column(foo)]" Diving into the code it seems the ID is always considered a Value type; i.e. "anything that is persisted by value, instead of by reference. It is essentially a Hibernate Type, together with zero or more columns." I could make my EntityFoo a value type by declaring it serializable, but I wouldn't expect this would lead to the right outcome either. I would have thought that Hibernate would consider the type of the column to be integer (or whatever the actual type of the parent's ID is), just like it would with a normal one-to-one link, but this doesn't appear to kick in when I also declare it an ID. Am I going beyond what is possible by trying to combine @OneToOne with @Id? And if so, how could one model this relationship sensibly?

    Read the article

  • Many-to-many mapping with LINQ

    - by Alexander
    I would like to perform LINQ to SQL mapping in C#, in a many-to-many relationship, but where data is not mandatory. To be clear: I have a news site/blog, and there's a table called Posts. A blog can relate to many categories at once, so there is a table called CategoriesPosts that links with foreign keys with the Posts table and with Categories table. I've made each table with an identity primary key, an id field in each one, if it matters in this case. In C# I defined a class for each table, defined each field as explicitly as possible. The Post class, as well as Category class, have a EntitySet to link to CategoryPost objects, and CategoryPost class has 2 EntityRef members to link to 2 objects of each other type. The problem is that a Post may relate or not to any category, as well as a category may have posts in it or not. I didn't find a way to make an EntitySet<CategoryPost?> or something like that. So when I added the first post, all went well with not a single SQL statement. Also, this post was present in the output. When I tried to add the second post I got an exception, Object reference not set to an instance of an object, regarding to the CategoryPost member. Post: [Table(Name="tm_posts")] public class Post : IDataErrorInfo { public Post() { //Initialization of NOT NULL fields with their default values } [Column(Name = "id", DbType = "int", CanBeNull = false, IsDbGenerated = true, IsPrimaryKey = true)] public int ID { get; set; } private EntitySet<CategoryPost> _categoryRef = new EntitySet<CategoryPost>(); [Association(Name = "tm_rel_categories_posts_fk2", IsForeignKey = true, Storage = "_categoryRef", ThisKey = "ID", OtherKey = "PostID")] public EntitySet<CategoryPost> CategoryRef { get { return _categoryRef; } set { _categoryRef.Assign(value); } } } CategoryPost [Table(Name = "tm_rel_categories_posts")] public class CategoryPost { [Column(Name = "id", DbType = "int", CanBeNull = false, IsDbGenerated = true, IsPrimaryKey = true)] public int ID { get; set; } [Column(Name = "fk_post", DbType = "int", CanBeNull = false)] public int PostID { get; set; } [Column(Name = "fk_category", DbType = "int", CanBeNull = false)] public int CategoryID { get; set; } private EntityRef<Post> _post = new EntityRef<Post>(); [Association(Name = "tm_rel_categories_posts_fk2", IsForeignKey = true, Storage = "_post", ThisKey = "PostID", OtherKey = "ID")] public Post Post { get { return _post.Entity; } set { _post.Entity = value; } } private EntityRef<Category> _category = new EntityRef<Category>(); [Association(Name = "tm_rel_categories_posts_fk", IsForeignKey = true, Storage = "_category", ThisKey = "CategoryID", OtherKey = "ID")] public Category Category { get { return _category.Entity; } set { _category.Entity = value; } } } Category [Table(Name="tm_categories")] public class Category { [Column(Name = "id", DbType = "int", CanBeNull = false, IsDbGenerated = true, IsPrimaryKey = true)] public int ID { get; set; } [Column(Name = "fk_parent", DbType = "int", CanBeNull = true)] public int ParentID { get; set; } private EntityRef<Category> _parent = new EntityRef<Category>(); [Association(Name = "tm_posts_fk2", IsForeignKey = true, Storage = "_parent", ThisKey = "ParentID", OtherKey = "ID")] public Category Parent { get { return _parent.Entity; } set { _parent.Entity = value; } } [Column(Name = "name", DbType = "varchar(100)", CanBeNull = false)] public string Name { get; set; } } So what am I doing wrong? How to make it possible to insert a post that doesn't belong to any category? How to insert categories with no posts?

    Read the article

  • How to access the backing field of an inherited class using fluent nhibernate

    - by Akk
    How do i set the Access Strategy in the mapping class to point to the inherited _photos field? public class Content { private IList<Photo> _photos; public Content() { _photos = new List<Photo>(); } public virtual IEnumerable<Photo> Photos { get { return _photos; } } public virtual void AddPhoto() {...} } public class Article : Content { public string Body {get; set;} } I am currently using thw following to try and locate the backing field but an exception is thrown as it cannot be found. public class ArticleMap : ClassMap<Article> { HasManyToMany(x => x.Photos) .Access.CamelCaseField(Prefix.Underscore) //_photos //... } i tried moving the backing field _photos directly into the class and the access works. So how can i access the backing field of an inherited class?

    Read the article

  • @OneToOne and @JoinColumn, auto delete null entity , doable?

    - by smallufo
    I have two Entities , with the following JPA annotations : @Entity @Table(name = "Owner") public class Owner implements Serializable { @Id @GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO) @Column(name = "id") private long id; @OneToOne(fetch=FetchType.EAGER , cascade=CascadeType.ALL) @JoinColumn(name="Data_id") private Data Data; } @Entity @Table(name = "Data") public class Data implements Serializable { @Id private long id; } Owner and Data has one-to-one mapping , the owning side is Owner. The problem occurs when I execute : owner.setData(null) ; ownerDao.update(owner) ; The "Owner" table's Data_id becomes null , that's correct. But the "Data" row is not deleted automatically. I have to write another DataDao , and another service layer to wrap the two actions ( ownerDao.update(owner) ; dataDao.delete(data); ) Is it possible to make a data row automatically deleted when the owning Owner set it to null ?

    Read the article

  • JPA/Hibernate Parent/Child relationship

    - by NubieJ
    Hi I am quite new to JPA/Hibernate (Java in general) so my question is as follows (note, I have searched far and wide and have not come across an answer to this): I have two entities: Parent and Child (naming changed). Parent contains a list of Children and Children refers back to parent. e.g. @Entity public class Parent { @Id @Basic @GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY) @Column(name = "PARENT_ID", insertable = false, updatable = false) private int id; /* ..... */ @OneToMany(cascade = { CascadeType.ALL }, fetch = FetchType.LAZY) @JoinColumn(name = "PARENT_ID", referencedColumnName = "PARENT_ID", nullable = true) private Set<child> children; /* ..... */ } @Entity public class Child { @Id @Basic @GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY) @Column(name = "CHILD_ID", insertable = false, updatable = false) private int id; /* ..... */ @ManyToOne(cascade = { CascadeType.REFRESH }, fetch = FetchType.EAGER, optional = false) @JoinColumn(name = "PARENT_ID", referencedColumnName = "PARENT_ID") private Parent parent; /* ..... */ } I want to be able to do the following: Retrieve a Parent entity which would contain a list of all its children (List), however, when listing Parent (getting List, it of course should omit the children from the results, therefore setting FetchType.LAZY. Retrieve a Child entity which would contain an instance of the Parent entity. Using the code above (or similar) results in two exceptions: Retrieving Parent: A cycle is detected in the object graph. This will cause infinitely deep XML... Retrieving Child: org.hibernate.LazyInitializationException: failed to lazily initialize a collection of role: xxxxxxxxxxx, no session or session was closed When retrieving the Parent entity, I am using a named query (i.e. calling it specifically) @NamedQuery(name = "Parent.findByParentId", query = "SELECT p FROM Parent AS p LEFT JOIN FETCH p.children where p.id = :id") Code to get Parent (i.e. service layer): public Parent findByParentId(int parentId) { Query query = em.createNamedQuery("Parent.findByParentId"); query.setParameter("id", parentId); return (Parent) query.getSingleResult(); } Why am I getting a LazyInitializationException event though the List property on the Parent entity is set as Lazy (when retrieving the Child entity)?

    Read the article

  • Seam/Hibernate and PostgreSQL -- Any issues?

    - by Shadowman
    I'm currently working on a project that makes use of Seam/Hibernate (JPA) on MySQL. I'm reconsidering moving towards PostgreSQL after investigating some of the features that it provides. My question is, is there anything I need to worry about with this configuration? Limitations? Gotchas? Things to watch out for? There will be some BLOBs stored in the database (images, X.509 certificates, etc.) Will that be a problem using PostgreSQL? Are there any particular configuration changes or tweaks that I should make in my Hibernate configuration? Thanks for any advice you can give!

    Read the article

  • FieldError when annotating over foreign keys

    - by X_9
    I have a models file that looks similar to the following: class WithDate(models.Model): adddedDate = models.DateTimeField(auto_now_add=True) modifiedDate = models.DateTimeField(auto_now=True) class Meta: abstract = True class Match(WithDate): ... class Notify(WithDate): matchId = models.ForeignKey(Match) headline = models.CharField(null=True, blank=True, max_length=10) For each Match I'm trying to get a count of notify records that have a headline. So my call looks like matchObjs = Match.objects.annotate(notifies_made=Count('notify__headline__isnull')) This keeps throwing a FieldError. I've simplified the query down to matchObjs = Match.objects.annotate(notifies_made=Count('notify')) And I still get the same FieldError... I've seen this work in other cases (other documentation, other SO questions like this one) but I can't figure out why I'm getting an error. The specific error that is returned is as follows: Cannot resolve keyword 'notify' into field. Choices are: (all fields from Match model) Does anyone have a clue as to why I can't get this annotation to work across tables? I'm baffled after looking at the other SO question and various Django docs where I've seen this done. Edit: I am using Django 1.1.1

    Read the article

  • Hibernate - get the size of a list in a property

    - by mada
    I have a class A which have a list of B elements. In my A class i would like to add: int size; which will be valued with the number of B elements. So when I would call myA.getSize() I will have it. Is it possible to map a count query with a single property in the hibernate mapping? I don't want to load the list that is why i would like to add a size property.

    Read the article

  • Hibernate bug using Oracle?

    - by Lothar
    Hello, I've got the problem, that I use a property in the persistence.xml which forces Hibernate to look only for tables in the given schema. <property name="hibernate.default_schema" value="FOO"/> Because we are using now 4 different schemas the actual solution is to generate 4 war files with a modified persistence.xml. That not very elegant. Does anybody know, how I can configure the schema with a property or by manipulation the JDBC connection string? I'm using Oracle 10g, 10_2_3 Patch. Thanks a lot.

    Read the article

  • How to map combinations of things to a relational database?

    - by Space_C0wb0y
    I have a table whose records represent certain objects. For the sake of simplicity I am going to assume that the table only has one row, and that is the unique ObjectId. Now I need a way to store combinations of objects from that table. The combinations have to be unique, but can be of arbitrary length. For example, if I have the ObjectIds 1,2,3,4 I want to store the following combinations: {1,2}, {1,3,4}, {2,4}, {1,2,3,4} The ordering is not necessary. My current implementation is to have a table Combinations that maps ObjectIds to CombinationIds. So every combination receives a unique Id: ObjectId | CombinationId ------------------------ 1 | 1 2 | 1 1 | 2 3 | 2 4 | 2 This is the mapping for the first two combinations of the example above. The problem is, that the query for finding the CombinationId of a specific Combination seems to be very complex. The two main usage scenarios for this table will be to iterate over all combinations, and the retrieve a specific combination. The table will be created once and never be updated. I am using SQLite through JDBC. Is there any simpler way or a best practice to implement such a mapping?

    Read the article

  • Hibernate without primary keys generated by db?

    - by Michael Jones
    I'm building a data warehouse and want to use InfiniDB as the storage engine. However, it doesn't allow primary keys or foreign key constraints (or any constraints for that matter). Hibernate complains "The database returned no natively generated identity value" when I perform an insert. Each table is relational, and contains a unique integer column that was previously used as the primary key - I want to keep that, but just not have the constraint in the db that the column is the primary key. I'm assuming the problem is that Hibernate expects the db to return a generated key. Is it possible to override this behaviour so I can set the primary key field's value myself and keep Hibernate happy? -- edit -- Two of the mappings are as follows: <?xml version="1.0"?> <!DOCTYPE hibernate-mapping PUBLIC "-//Hibernate/Hibernate Mapping DTD 3.0//EN" "http://hibernate.sourceforge.net/hibernate-mapping-3.0.dtd"> <!-- Generated Jun 1, 2010 2:49:51 PM by Hibernate Tools 3.2.1.GA --> <hibernate-mapping> <class name="com.example.project.Visitor" table="visitor" catalog="orwell"> <id name="id" type="java.lang.Long"> <column name="id" /> <generator class="identity" /> </id> <property name="firstSeen" type="timestamp"> <column name="first_seen" length="19" /> </property> <property name="lastSeen" type="timestamp"> <column name="last_seen" length="19" /> </property> <property name="sessionId" type="string"> <column name="session_id" length="26" unique="true" /> </property> <property name="userId" type="java.lang.Long"> <column name="user_id" /> </property> <set name="visits" inverse="true"> <key> <column name="visitor_id" /> </key> <one-to-many class="com.example.project.Visit" /> </set> </class> </hibernate-mapping> and: <?xml version="1.0"?> <!DOCTYPE hibernate-mapping PUBLIC "-//Hibernate/Hibernate Mapping DTD 3.0//EN" "http://hibernate.sourceforge.net/hibernate-mapping-3.0.dtd"> <!-- Generated Jun 1, 2010 2:49:51 PM by Hibernate Tools 3.2.1.GA --> <hibernate-mapping> <class name="com.example.project.Visit" table="visit" catalog="orwell"> <id name="id" type="java.lang.Long"> <column name="id" /> <generator class="identity" /> </id> <many-to-one name="visitor" class="com.example.project.Visitor" fetch="join" cascade="all"> <column name="visitor_id" /> </many-to-one> <property name="visitId" type="string"> <column name="visit_id" length="20" unique="true" /> </property> <property name="startTime" type="timestamp"> <column name="start_time" length="19" /> </property> <property name="endTime" type="timestamp"> <column name="end_time" length="19" /> </property> <property name="userAgent" type="string"> <column name="user_agent" length="65535" /> </property> <set name="pageViews" inverse="true"> <key> <column name="visit_id" /> </key> <one-to-many class="com.example.project.PageView" /> </set> </class> </hibernate-mapping>

    Read the article

  • Django: Sum on an date attribute grouped by month/year

    - by Sébastien Piquemal
    Hello, I'd like to put this query from SQL to Django: "select date_format(date, '%Y-%m') as month, sum(quantity) as hours from hourentries group by date_format(date, '%Y-%m') order by date;" The part that causes problem is to group by month when aggregating. I tried this (which seemed logical), but it didn't work : HourEntries.objects.order_by("date").values("date__month").aggregate(Sum("quantity"))

    Read the article

  • Error in creating alias in formula tag

    - by Senthilnathan
    Hi all I have a sql query in formula tag inside property tag. In that query i am creating alias name but the hibernate appends table name and throwing me error. select sum(e.salary) as sal from employee e but hibernate changes to select sum(e.salary) as employee.sal from employee e how to avoid this .... it should recognise as sal inside of employee.sal !!!

    Read the article

  • How to exclude results with get_object_or_404?

    - by googletorp
    In Django you can use the exclude to create SQL similar to not equal. An example could be. Model.objects.exclude(status='deleted') Now this works great and exclude is very flexible. Since I'm a bit lazy, I would like to get that functionality when using get_object_or_404, but I haven't found a way to do this, since you cannot use exclude on get_object_or_404. What I want is to do something like this: model = get_object_or_404(pk=id, status__exclude='deleted') But unfortunately this doesn't work as there isn't an exclude query filter or similar. The best I've come up with so far is doing something like this: object = get_object_or_404(pk=id) if object.status == 'deleted': return HttpResponseNotfound('text') Doing something like that, really defeats the point of using get_object_or_404, since it no longer is a handy one-liner. Alternatively I could do: object = get_object_or_404(pk=id, status__in=['list', 'of', 'items']) But that wouldn't be very maintainable, as I would need to keep the list up to date. I'm wondering if I'm missing some trick or feature in django to use get_object_or_404 to get the desired result?

    Read the article

  • SQLAlchemy Custom Type Which Contains Multiple Columns

    - by Kekoa
    I would like to represent a datatype as a single column in my model, but really the data will be stored in multiple columns in the database. I cannot find any good resources on how to do this in SQLAlchemy. I would like my model to look like this(this is a simplified example using geometry instead of my real problem which is harder to explain): class 3DLine(DeclarativeBase): start_point = Column(my.custom.3DPoint) end_point = Column(my.custom.3DPoint) This way I could assign an object with the (x, y, z) components of the point at once without setting them individually. If I had to separate each component, this could get ugly, especially if each class has several of these composite objects. I would combine the values into one encoded field except that I need to query each value separately at times. I was able to find out how to make custom types using a single column in the documentation. But there's no indication that I can map a single type to multiple columns. I suppose I could accomplish this by using a separate table, and each column would be a foreign key, but in my case I don't think it makes sense to have a one to one mapping for each point to a separate table, and this still does not give the ability to set the related values all at once.

    Read the article

  • Getting my webapp to be database agnostic with Hibernate...

    - by JellyHead
    So the ultimate in scope-creep came in the other day: since we're using Hibernate, could we make our webapp run on Oracle as well as MySQL, interchangably? I thought this would be a simple case of changing hibernate.cfg.xml so that instead of explicity stating MySQL-specific options, it would reference a JNDI datasource, allowing the application to build regardless of the database we intend to deploy to. Then changing to a different database would simply mean changing the separate datasource configuration in JBoss, Jetty, WebLogic etc. Is this realistic? Well, I got as far as setting that up in Jetty, but What's tripping me up right now is error about the hibernate.dialect not having been set in hibernate.cfg.xml. But If I set the dialect there, then my app is still going to be built in either MySQL or Oracle flavours, which is not really what I want. Either I'm trying to attempt the impossible or I've missed something fundamentally obvious... anyone else had a similar problem (and subsequent solution/workaround)?

    Read the article

  • Java JPA @OneToMany neededs to reciprocate @ManyToOne?

    - by bguiz
    Create Table A ( ID varchar(8), Primary Key(ID) ); Create Table B ( ID varchar(8), A_ID varchar(8), Primary Key(ID), Foreign Key(A_ID) References A(ID) ); Given that I have created two tables using the SQL statements above, and I want to create Entity classes for them, for the class B, I have these member attributes: @Id @Column(name = "ID", nullable = false, length = 8) private String id; @JoinColumn(name = "A_ID", referencedColumnName = "ID", nullable = false) @ManyToOne(optional = false) private A AId; In class A, do I need to reciprocate the many-to-one relationship? @Id @Column(name = "ID", nullable = false, length = 8) private String id; @OneToMany(cascade = CascadeType.ALL, mappedBy = "AId") private List<B> BList; //<-- Is this attribute necessary? Is it a necessary or a good idea to have a reciprocal @OneToMany for the @ManyToOne? If I make the design decision to leave out the @OneToMany annotated attribute now, will come back to bite me further down.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33  | Next Page >