You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@ofbiz.apache.org by him_aeng <hi...@yahoo.co.th> on 2008/06/24 14:11:32 UTC
Many entities that should has foreign key but it not, why?
I see you intent to make two of compound key (budgetId and budgetItemSeqId)
of PaymentBudgetAllocation entity have relation-type = nofk that not similar
to "The Data Model Resource Book Vol.1" in Figure 8.10. I think you have to
has a good reason for implementation
/applications/accounting/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
<entity entity-name="PaymentBudgetAllocation"
package-name="org.ofbiz.accounting.payment"
title="Payment Budget Allocation Entity">
<field name="budgetId" type="id-ne"></field>
<field name="budgetItemSeqId" type="id-ne"></field>
<field name="paymentId" type="id-ne"></field>
<field name="amount" type="currency-amount"></field>
<prim-key field="budgetId"/>
<prim-key field="budgetItemSeqId"/>
<prim-key field="paymentId"/>
<relation type="one" fk-name="PAYMENT_BA_BDGT"
rel-entity-name="Budget">
<key-map field-name="budgetId"/>
</relation>
- <relation type="one-nofk" rel-entity-name="BudgetItem">
+ <relation type="one" fk-name="PAYMENT_BUDGIT"
rel-entity-name="BudgetItem">
<key-map field-name="budgetId"/>
<key-map field-name="budgetItemSeqId"/>
</relation>
<relation type="one" fk-name="PAYMENT_BA_PMT"
rel-entity-name="Payment">
<key-map field-name="paymentId"/>
</relation>
</entity>
and another question in the same figure in the book (Figure 8.10). In
order_item entity has two attribute that is budgetId and budgetItemSeqId but
you don't use it to link to budget_item entity, and I don't know why?
/applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
<entity entity-name="OrderItem"
package-name="org.ofbiz.order.order"
never-cache="true"
title="Order Item Entity">
<field name="orderId" type="id-ne"></field>
<field name="orderItemSeqId" type="id-ne"></field>
<field name="externalId" type="id"></field>
<field name="orderItemTypeId" type="id-ne"></field>
<field name="orderItemGroupSeqId" type="id-ne"></field>
<field name="isItemGroupPrimary" type="indicator"></field>
<field name="fromInventoryItemId" type="id"></field>
<field name="budgetId" type="id"></field>
<field name="budgetItemSeqId" type="id"></field>
...
+ <relation type="one" fk-name="ORDER_ITEM_BUDGET_ITEM"
rel-entity-name="BudgetItem">
+ <key-map field-name="budgetId"/>
+ <key-map field-name="budgetItemSeqId"/>
+ </relation>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Many-entities-that-should-has-foreign-key-but-it-not%2C-why--tp18089666p18089666.html
Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Many entities that should has foreign key but it not, why?
Posted by him_aeng <hi...@yahoo.co.th>.
Thank you very much for your kindly reply. Your reply make my brain get fresh
(but still dumb)
Thank you again
Tanakorn Numrubporn
Rishi Solanki wrote:
>
> The relation-type = nofk is used when we need a relation but don't want to
> apply foreign key constraints on it.
> This relation comes in existance only when we need to use the attribute of
> a
> entity into another entity. And we needed
> that when we delete/expire a record from entity say
> "PaymentBudgetAllocation" then their is no need to delete the record
> from "BudgetItem". In such case we specify relation-type = nofk.
>
> Thanks and Regards
> [Rishi Solnaki]
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 5:41 PM, him_aeng <hi...@yahoo.co.th> wrote:
>
>>
>> I see you intent to make two of compound key (budgetId and
>> budgetItemSeqId)
>> of PaymentBudgetAllocation entity have relation-type = nofk that not
>> similar
>> to "The Data Model Resource Book Vol.1" in Figure 8.10. I think you have
>> to
>> has a good reason for implementation
>>
>> /applications/accounting/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
>>
>> <entity entity-name="PaymentBudgetAllocation"
>> package-name="org.ofbiz.accounting.payment"
>> title="Payment Budget Allocation Entity">
>> <field name="budgetId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> <field name="budgetItemSeqId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> <field name="paymentId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> <field name="amount" type="currency-amount"></field>
>> <prim-key field="budgetId"/>
>> <prim-key field="budgetItemSeqId"/>
>> <prim-key field="paymentId"/>
>> <relation type="one" fk-name="PAYMENT_BA_BDGT"
>> rel-entity-name="Budget">
>> <key-map field-name="budgetId"/>
>> </relation>
>> - <relation type="one-nofk" rel-entity-name="BudgetItem">
>> + <relation type="one" fk-name="PAYMENT_BUDGIT"
>> rel-entity-name="BudgetItem">
>> <key-map field-name="budgetId"/>
>> <key-map field-name="budgetItemSeqId"/>
>> </relation>
>> <relation type="one" fk-name="PAYMENT_BA_PMT"
>> rel-entity-name="Payment">
>> <key-map field-name="paymentId"/>
>> </relation>
>> </entity>
>>
>> and another question in the same figure in the book (Figure 8.10). In
>> order_item entity has two attribute that is budgetId and budgetItemSeqId
>> but
>> you don't use it to link to budget_item entity, and I don't know why?
>>
>> /applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
>>
>> <entity entity-name="OrderItem"
>> package-name="org.ofbiz.order.order"
>> never-cache="true"
>> title="Order Item Entity">
>> <field name="orderId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> <field name="orderItemSeqId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> <field name="externalId" type="id"></field>
>> <field name="orderItemTypeId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> <field name="orderItemGroupSeqId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> <field name="isItemGroupPrimary" type="indicator"></field>
>> <field name="fromInventoryItemId" type="id"></field>
>> <field name="budgetId" type="id"></field>
>> <field name="budgetItemSeqId" type="id"></field>
>> ...
>> + <relation type="one" fk-name="ORDER_ITEM_BUDGET_ITEM"
>> rel-entity-name="BudgetItem">
>> + <key-map field-name="budgetId"/>
>> + <key-map field-name="budgetItemSeqId"/>
>> + </relation>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Many-entities-that-should-has-foreign-key-but-it-not%2C-why--tp18089666p18089666.html
>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Many-entities-that-should-has-foreign-key-but-it-not%2C-why--tp18089666p18112059.html
Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Many entities that should has foreign key but it not, why?
Posted by him_aeng <hi...@yahoo.co.th>.
Thank you for your cool reply.
Best Regards
Tanakorn Numrubporn
Mridul Pathak-2 wrote:
>
> No foreign key indices are maintained for the one-nofk relationship, that
> is
> the reason why no foreign key constraints apply to a one-nofk
> relationship.
> This may be the reason that you are not able to locate this relation is
> the
> constraint part. You can find this relationship in the Webtools
> application
> in context of the entity you are looking for. In case of one-nofk
> relationship constraints do not apply but you can fetch the related data
> on
> the basis of this relationship. This is the reason of keeping this
> relationship, you can have access to related data but you need not to
> worry
> about any constraints while performing CRUD operations.
>
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 6:59 PM, him_aeng <hi...@yahoo.co.th> wrote:
>
>>
>> Sorry for asking another question. When I see to the "Real Database" that
>> OFBiz just constructed and look in to the constraint part of
>> "PaymentBudgetAllocation" I can't see any thing that point to the
>> "one-nofk"
>> thing. It show only which is "one" thing in database. Is that mean, It
>> doesn't matter that you specify relation-type = one-nofk or not? The real
>> entity in RDBMS remain the same (don't have relation at all).
>>
>> So, I just feel strange that what the purpose of "one-nofk"
>> relation-type?
>>
>> Thank and Regards
>> Tanakorn Numrubporn
>>
>>
>> Rishi Solanki wrote:
>> >
>> > The relation-type = nofk is used when we need a relation but don't want
>> to
>> > apply foreign key constraints on it.
>> > This relation comes in existance only when we need to use the attribute
>> of
>> > a
>> > entity into another entity. And we needed
>> > that when we delete/expire a record from entity say
>> > "PaymentBudgetAllocation" then their is no need to delete the record
>> > from "BudgetItem". In such case we specify relation-type = nofk.
>> >
>> > Thanks and Regards
>> > [Rishi Solnaki]
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 5:41 PM, him_aeng <hi...@yahoo.co.th> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> I see you intent to make two of compound key (budgetId and
>> >> budgetItemSeqId)
>> >> of PaymentBudgetAllocation entity have relation-type = nofk that not
>> >> similar
>> >> to "The Data Model Resource Book Vol.1" in Figure 8.10. I think you
>> have
>> >> to
>> >> has a good reason for implementation
>> >>
>> >> /applications/accounting/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
>> >>
>> >> <entity entity-name="PaymentBudgetAllocation"
>> >> package-name="org.ofbiz.accounting.payment"
>> >> title="Payment Budget Allocation Entity">
>> >> <field name="budgetId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> >> <field name="budgetItemSeqId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> >> <field name="paymentId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> >> <field name="amount" type="currency-amount"></field>
>> >> <prim-key field="budgetId"/>
>> >> <prim-key field="budgetItemSeqId"/>
>> >> <prim-key field="paymentId"/>
>> >> <relation type="one" fk-name="PAYMENT_BA_BDGT"
>> >> rel-entity-name="Budget">
>> >> <key-map field-name="budgetId"/>
>> >> </relation>
>> >> - <relation type="one-nofk" rel-entity-name="BudgetItem">
>> >> + <relation type="one" fk-name="PAYMENT_BUDGIT"
>> >> rel-entity-name="BudgetItem">
>> >> <key-map field-name="budgetId"/>
>> >> <key-map field-name="budgetItemSeqId"/>
>> >> </relation>
>> >> <relation type="one" fk-name="PAYMENT_BA_PMT"
>> >> rel-entity-name="Payment">
>> >> <key-map field-name="paymentId"/>
>> >> </relation>
>> >> </entity>
>> >>
>> >> and another question in the same figure in the book (Figure 8.10). In
>> >> order_item entity has two attribute that is budgetId and
>> budgetItemSeqId
>> >> but
>> >> you don't use it to link to budget_item entity, and I don't know why?
>> >>
>> >> /applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
>> >>
>> >> <entity entity-name="OrderItem"
>> >> package-name="org.ofbiz.order.order"
>> >> never-cache="true"
>> >> title="Order Item Entity">
>> >> <field name="orderId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> >> <field name="orderItemSeqId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> >> <field name="externalId" type="id"></field>
>> >> <field name="orderItemTypeId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> >> <field name="orderItemGroupSeqId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> >> <field name="isItemGroupPrimary" type="indicator"></field>
>> >> <field name="fromInventoryItemId" type="id"></field>
>> >> <field name="budgetId" type="id"></field>
>> >> <field name="budgetItemSeqId" type="id"></field>
>> >> ...
>> >> + <relation type="one" fk-name="ORDER_ITEM_BUDGET_ITEM"
>> >> rel-entity-name="BudgetItem">
>> >> + <key-map field-name="budgetId"/>
>> >> + <key-map field-name="budgetItemSeqId"/>
>> >> + </relation>
>> >> --
>> >> View this message in context:
>> >>
>> http://www.nabble.com/Many-entities-that-should-has-foreign-key-but-it-not%2C-why--tp18089666p18089666.html
>> >> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Many-entities-that-should-has-foreign-key-but-it-not%2C-why--tp18089666p18112499.html
>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Thanks & Regards
> Mridul Pathak
> Hotwax Media
> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
> mridul.pathak@hotwaxmedia.com
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Many-entities-that-should-has-foreign-key-but-it-not%2C-why--tp18089666p18127155.html
Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Many entities that should has foreign key but it not, why?
Posted by Mridul Pathak <mr...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
No foreign key indices are maintained for the one-nofk relationship, that is
the reason why no foreign key constraints apply to a one-nofk relationship.
This may be the reason that you are not able to locate this relation is the
constraint part. You can find this relationship in the Webtools application
in context of the entity you are looking for. In case of one-nofk
relationship constraints do not apply but you can fetch the related data on
the basis of this relationship. This is the reason of keeping this
relationship, you can have access to related data but you need not to worry
about any constraints while performing CRUD operations.
On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 6:59 PM, him_aeng <hi...@yahoo.co.th> wrote:
>
> Sorry for asking another question. When I see to the "Real Database" that
> OFBiz just constructed and look in to the constraint part of
> "PaymentBudgetAllocation" I can't see any thing that point to the
> "one-nofk"
> thing. It show only which is "one" thing in database. Is that mean, It
> doesn't matter that you specify relation-type = one-nofk or not? The real
> entity in RDBMS remain the same (don't have relation at all).
>
> So, I just feel strange that what the purpose of "one-nofk" relation-type?
>
> Thank and Regards
> Tanakorn Numrubporn
>
>
> Rishi Solanki wrote:
> >
> > The relation-type = nofk is used when we need a relation but don't want
> to
> > apply foreign key constraints on it.
> > This relation comes in existance only when we need to use the attribute
> of
> > a
> > entity into another entity. And we needed
> > that when we delete/expire a record from entity say
> > "PaymentBudgetAllocation" then their is no need to delete the record
> > from "BudgetItem". In such case we specify relation-type = nofk.
> >
> > Thanks and Regards
> > [Rishi Solnaki]
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 5:41 PM, him_aeng <hi...@yahoo.co.th> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I see you intent to make two of compound key (budgetId and
> >> budgetItemSeqId)
> >> of PaymentBudgetAllocation entity have relation-type = nofk that not
> >> similar
> >> to "The Data Model Resource Book Vol.1" in Figure 8.10. I think you have
> >> to
> >> has a good reason for implementation
> >>
> >> /applications/accounting/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
> >>
> >> <entity entity-name="PaymentBudgetAllocation"
> >> package-name="org.ofbiz.accounting.payment"
> >> title="Payment Budget Allocation Entity">
> >> <field name="budgetId" type="id-ne"></field>
> >> <field name="budgetItemSeqId" type="id-ne"></field>
> >> <field name="paymentId" type="id-ne"></field>
> >> <field name="amount" type="currency-amount"></field>
> >> <prim-key field="budgetId"/>
> >> <prim-key field="budgetItemSeqId"/>
> >> <prim-key field="paymentId"/>
> >> <relation type="one" fk-name="PAYMENT_BA_BDGT"
> >> rel-entity-name="Budget">
> >> <key-map field-name="budgetId"/>
> >> </relation>
> >> - <relation type="one-nofk" rel-entity-name="BudgetItem">
> >> + <relation type="one" fk-name="PAYMENT_BUDGIT"
> >> rel-entity-name="BudgetItem">
> >> <key-map field-name="budgetId"/>
> >> <key-map field-name="budgetItemSeqId"/>
> >> </relation>
> >> <relation type="one" fk-name="PAYMENT_BA_PMT"
> >> rel-entity-name="Payment">
> >> <key-map field-name="paymentId"/>
> >> </relation>
> >> </entity>
> >>
> >> and another question in the same figure in the book (Figure 8.10). In
> >> order_item entity has two attribute that is budgetId and budgetItemSeqId
> >> but
> >> you don't use it to link to budget_item entity, and I don't know why?
> >>
> >> /applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
> >>
> >> <entity entity-name="OrderItem"
> >> package-name="org.ofbiz.order.order"
> >> never-cache="true"
> >> title="Order Item Entity">
> >> <field name="orderId" type="id-ne"></field>
> >> <field name="orderItemSeqId" type="id-ne"></field>
> >> <field name="externalId" type="id"></field>
> >> <field name="orderItemTypeId" type="id-ne"></field>
> >> <field name="orderItemGroupSeqId" type="id-ne"></field>
> >> <field name="isItemGroupPrimary" type="indicator"></field>
> >> <field name="fromInventoryItemId" type="id"></field>
> >> <field name="budgetId" type="id"></field>
> >> <field name="budgetItemSeqId" type="id"></field>
> >> ...
> >> + <relation type="one" fk-name="ORDER_ITEM_BUDGET_ITEM"
> >> rel-entity-name="BudgetItem">
> >> + <key-map field-name="budgetId"/>
> >> + <key-map field-name="budgetItemSeqId"/>
> >> + </relation>
> >> --
> >> View this message in context:
> >>
> http://www.nabble.com/Many-entities-that-should-has-foreign-key-but-it-not%2C-why--tp18089666p18089666.html
> >> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Many-entities-that-should-has-foreign-key-but-it-not%2C-why--tp18089666p18112499.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
--
Thanks & Regards
Mridul Pathak
Hotwax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
mridul.pathak@hotwaxmedia.com
Re: Many entities that should has foreign key but it not, why?
Posted by him_aeng <hi...@yahoo.co.th>.
Sorry for asking another question. When I see to the "Real Database" that
OFBiz just constructed and look in to the constraint part of
"PaymentBudgetAllocation" I can't see any thing that point to the "one-nofk"
thing. It show only which is "one" thing in database. Is that mean, It
doesn't matter that you specify relation-type = one-nofk or not? The real
entity in RDBMS remain the same (don't have relation at all).
So, I just feel strange that what the purpose of "one-nofk" relation-type?
Thank and Regards
Tanakorn Numrubporn
Rishi Solanki wrote:
>
> The relation-type = nofk is used when we need a relation but don't want to
> apply foreign key constraints on it.
> This relation comes in existance only when we need to use the attribute of
> a
> entity into another entity. And we needed
> that when we delete/expire a record from entity say
> "PaymentBudgetAllocation" then their is no need to delete the record
> from "BudgetItem". In such case we specify relation-type = nofk.
>
> Thanks and Regards
> [Rishi Solnaki]
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 5:41 PM, him_aeng <hi...@yahoo.co.th> wrote:
>
>>
>> I see you intent to make two of compound key (budgetId and
>> budgetItemSeqId)
>> of PaymentBudgetAllocation entity have relation-type = nofk that not
>> similar
>> to "The Data Model Resource Book Vol.1" in Figure 8.10. I think you have
>> to
>> has a good reason for implementation
>>
>> /applications/accounting/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
>>
>> <entity entity-name="PaymentBudgetAllocation"
>> package-name="org.ofbiz.accounting.payment"
>> title="Payment Budget Allocation Entity">
>> <field name="budgetId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> <field name="budgetItemSeqId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> <field name="paymentId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> <field name="amount" type="currency-amount"></field>
>> <prim-key field="budgetId"/>
>> <prim-key field="budgetItemSeqId"/>
>> <prim-key field="paymentId"/>
>> <relation type="one" fk-name="PAYMENT_BA_BDGT"
>> rel-entity-name="Budget">
>> <key-map field-name="budgetId"/>
>> </relation>
>> - <relation type="one-nofk" rel-entity-name="BudgetItem">
>> + <relation type="one" fk-name="PAYMENT_BUDGIT"
>> rel-entity-name="BudgetItem">
>> <key-map field-name="budgetId"/>
>> <key-map field-name="budgetItemSeqId"/>
>> </relation>
>> <relation type="one" fk-name="PAYMENT_BA_PMT"
>> rel-entity-name="Payment">
>> <key-map field-name="paymentId"/>
>> </relation>
>> </entity>
>>
>> and another question in the same figure in the book (Figure 8.10). In
>> order_item entity has two attribute that is budgetId and budgetItemSeqId
>> but
>> you don't use it to link to budget_item entity, and I don't know why?
>>
>> /applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
>>
>> <entity entity-name="OrderItem"
>> package-name="org.ofbiz.order.order"
>> never-cache="true"
>> title="Order Item Entity">
>> <field name="orderId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> <field name="orderItemSeqId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> <field name="externalId" type="id"></field>
>> <field name="orderItemTypeId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> <field name="orderItemGroupSeqId" type="id-ne"></field>
>> <field name="isItemGroupPrimary" type="indicator"></field>
>> <field name="fromInventoryItemId" type="id"></field>
>> <field name="budgetId" type="id"></field>
>> <field name="budgetItemSeqId" type="id"></field>
>> ...
>> + <relation type="one" fk-name="ORDER_ITEM_BUDGET_ITEM"
>> rel-entity-name="BudgetItem">
>> + <key-map field-name="budgetId"/>
>> + <key-map field-name="budgetItemSeqId"/>
>> + </relation>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Many-entities-that-should-has-foreign-key-but-it-not%2C-why--tp18089666p18089666.html
>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Many-entities-that-should-has-foreign-key-but-it-not%2C-why--tp18089666p18112499.html
Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Many entities that should has foreign key but it not, why?
Posted by Rishi Solanki <ri...@gmail.com>.
The relation-type = nofk is used when we need a relation but don't want to
apply foreign key constraints on it.
This relation comes in existance only when we need to use the attribute of a
entity into another entity. And we needed
that when we delete/expire a record from entity say
"PaymentBudgetAllocation" then their is no need to delete the record
from "BudgetItem". In such case we specify relation-type = nofk.
Thanks and Regards
[Rishi Solnaki]
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 5:41 PM, him_aeng <hi...@yahoo.co.th> wrote:
>
> I see you intent to make two of compound key (budgetId and budgetItemSeqId)
> of PaymentBudgetAllocation entity have relation-type = nofk that not
> similar
> to "The Data Model Resource Book Vol.1" in Figure 8.10. I think you have to
> has a good reason for implementation
>
> /applications/accounting/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
>
> <entity entity-name="PaymentBudgetAllocation"
> package-name="org.ofbiz.accounting.payment"
> title="Payment Budget Allocation Entity">
> <field name="budgetId" type="id-ne"></field>
> <field name="budgetItemSeqId" type="id-ne"></field>
> <field name="paymentId" type="id-ne"></field>
> <field name="amount" type="currency-amount"></field>
> <prim-key field="budgetId"/>
> <prim-key field="budgetItemSeqId"/>
> <prim-key field="paymentId"/>
> <relation type="one" fk-name="PAYMENT_BA_BDGT"
> rel-entity-name="Budget">
> <key-map field-name="budgetId"/>
> </relation>
> - <relation type="one-nofk" rel-entity-name="BudgetItem">
> + <relation type="one" fk-name="PAYMENT_BUDGIT"
> rel-entity-name="BudgetItem">
> <key-map field-name="budgetId"/>
> <key-map field-name="budgetItemSeqId"/>
> </relation>
> <relation type="one" fk-name="PAYMENT_BA_PMT"
> rel-entity-name="Payment">
> <key-map field-name="paymentId"/>
> </relation>
> </entity>
>
> and another question in the same figure in the book (Figure 8.10). In
> order_item entity has two attribute that is budgetId and budgetItemSeqId
> but
> you don't use it to link to budget_item entity, and I don't know why?
>
> /applications/order/entitydef/entitymodel.xml
>
> <entity entity-name="OrderItem"
> package-name="org.ofbiz.order.order"
> never-cache="true"
> title="Order Item Entity">
> <field name="orderId" type="id-ne"></field>
> <field name="orderItemSeqId" type="id-ne"></field>
> <field name="externalId" type="id"></field>
> <field name="orderItemTypeId" type="id-ne"></field>
> <field name="orderItemGroupSeqId" type="id-ne"></field>
> <field name="isItemGroupPrimary" type="indicator"></field>
> <field name="fromInventoryItemId" type="id"></field>
> <field name="budgetId" type="id"></field>
> <field name="budgetItemSeqId" type="id"></field>
> ...
> + <relation type="one" fk-name="ORDER_ITEM_BUDGET_ITEM"
> rel-entity-name="BudgetItem">
> + <key-map field-name="budgetId"/>
> + <key-map field-name="budgetItemSeqId"/>
> + </relation>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Many-entities-that-should-has-foreign-key-but-it-not%2C-why--tp18089666p18089666.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>