You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openjpa.apache.org by "Michael Vorburger (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2008/05/07 19:18:57 UTC
[jira] Created: (OPENJPA-593) Embedded element/key/value types
should not be limited to simple fields and direct relations to other
persistent types, but allow embedded Collections
Embedded element/key/value types should not be limited to simple fields and direct relations to other persistent types, but allow embedded Collections
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: OPENJPA-593
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-593
Project: OpenJPA
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: jdbc
Affects Versions: 1.1.0
Reporter: Michael Vorburger
Fix For: 1.1.0
It's a pitty that @PersistentCollection(elementEmbedded = true) only works to to "depth 1", that is you can apparently not have an @Entity class A { @PersistentCollection(elementEmbedded=true) private Set<B> bs = new HashSet<B>(); ... } with @Entity class B again a { @PersistentCollection(elementEmbedded=true) private Set<C> bs = new HashSet<C>(); ... }.
On OpenJPA 1.1, this leads to the error: "org.apache.openjpa.util.MetaDataException: "X.y<element:class Y>" is mapped as embedded, but embedded field "..." is not embeddable. Embedded element/key/value types are limited to simple fields and direct relations to other persistent types."
The expected outcome would to have a schema with an SQL table A, an A_B (that works already!), and an A_B_C table (that doesn't work).
JPA 2.0 JSR 317 <http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=317> says "... support for collections of embedded objects, multiple levels of embedded objects ..." so may this will be supported 'soon-ish' (that one liner may not refer to this exact use case)?
PS: This limitation has unfortunately turned into a show stopper for our use of OpenJPA, and made us look at another ORM which seems to support this kind of mapping.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Updated: (OPENJPA-593) Embedded element/key/value types
should not be limited to simple fields and direct relations to other
persistent types, but allow embedded Collections
Posted by "Patrick Linskey (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-593?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Patrick Linskey updated OPENJPA-593:
------------------------------------
Fix Version/s: (was: 1.1.0)
1.2.0
> Embedded element/key/value types should not be limited to simple fields and direct relations to other persistent types, but allow embedded Collections
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OPENJPA-593
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-593
> Project: OpenJPA
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: jdbc
> Affects Versions: 1.1.0
> Reporter: Michael Vorburger
> Fix For: 1.2.0
>
>
> It's a pitty that @PersistentCollection(elementEmbedded = true) only works to to "depth 1", that is you can apparently not have an @Entity class A { @PersistentCollection(elementEmbedded=true) private Set<B> bs = new HashSet<B>(); ... } with @Entity class B again a { @PersistentCollection(elementEmbedded=true) private Set<C> bs = new HashSet<C>(); ... }.
> On OpenJPA 1.1, this leads to the error: "org.apache.openjpa.util.MetaDataException: "X.y<element:class Y>" is mapped as embedded, but embedded field "..." is not embeddable. Embedded element/key/value types are limited to simple fields and direct relations to other persistent types."
> The expected outcome would to have a schema with an SQL table A, an A_B (that works already!), and an A_B_C table (that doesn't work).
> JPA 2.0 JSR 317 <http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=317> says "... support for collections of embedded objects, multiple levels of embedded objects ..." so may this will be supported 'soon-ish' (that one liner may not refer to this exact use case)?
> PS: This limitation has unfortunately turned into a show stopper for our use of OpenJPA, and made us look at another ORM which seems to support this kind of mapping.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Updated: (OPENJPA-593) Embedded element/key/value types
should not be limited to simple fields and direct relations to other
persistent types, but allow embedded Collections
Posted by "Michael Dick (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-593?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Michael Dick updated OPENJPA-593:
---------------------------------
Fix Version/s: (was: 1.2.0)
1.3.0
Moving to next release
> Embedded element/key/value types should not be limited to simple fields and direct relations to other persistent types, but allow embedded Collections
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OPENJPA-593
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-593
> Project: OpenJPA
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: jdbc
> Affects Versions: 1.1.0
> Reporter: Michael Vorburger
> Fix For: 1.3.0
>
>
> It's a pitty that @PersistentCollection(elementEmbedded = true) only works to to "depth 1", that is you can apparently not have an @Entity class A { @PersistentCollection(elementEmbedded=true) private Set<B> bs = new HashSet<B>(); ... } with @Entity class B again a { @PersistentCollection(elementEmbedded=true) private Set<C> bs = new HashSet<C>(); ... }.
> On OpenJPA 1.1, this leads to the error: "org.apache.openjpa.util.MetaDataException: "X.y<element:class Y>" is mapped as embedded, but embedded field "..." is not embeddable. Embedded element/key/value types are limited to simple fields and direct relations to other persistent types."
> The expected outcome would to have a schema with an SQL table A, an A_B (that works already!), and an A_B_C table (that doesn't work).
> JPA 2.0 JSR 317 <http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=317> says "... support for collections of embedded objects, multiple levels of embedded objects ..." so may this will be supported 'soon-ish' (that one liner may not refer to this exact use case)?
> PS: This limitation has unfortunately turned into a show stopper for our use of OpenJPA, and made us look at another ORM which seems to support this kind of mapping.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.