We Keep Coding

Circumventing Attribute Limitations of Many-to-Many Relations in JPA

I am using PostgreSQL 12.11, JPA 3.1.0, and Hibernate 5.6.10. This might become important because I am doing things that apparently do not work with JPA 2.0.
My goal is to add an attribute to a many-to-many relationship. I found this posting. #Mikko Maunu states that "There is no concept of having additional persistent attribute in relation in JPA (2.0)." To me, this sounds like what I want to do is not possible. However, the answer is rather old and might not be complete anymore.
Beside the time gap and the version gap, this is, in my opinion, a new question because I am doing something that is probably questionable and not part of the original thread.
What I did is this:
Create a #ManyToMany relationship in JPA and specify a #JoinTable.
Manually define an entity with identical table name to the table specified in 1. For this table, I chose a composite primary key using #IdClass. I also added my attribute.
Inside one of the n:m-connected entities, create a #OneToMany relationship to the connection-table-entity created in 2. However, I did not create a corresponding #ManyToOne relationship as that would have created an error.
As a result, I can access the original entities and their relation as many-to-many, but also the relation itself, which is not an entity in the original ERM, but it is for JPA. First tests show this seems to be working.
I am aware, however, that I basically access the same part of the persistence (the PostgreSQL database) through two different ways at the same time.
Now my questions are:
Is this a valid way to do it? Or will I get in bad trouble at one point?
Is there a situation where I will need to refresh to prevent trouble?
Is this something new in JPA > 2.0, or just an extension to the original answer?

This should help.
Here is how I do it:
#Entity
#Table(name = "person", schema = "crm")
public final class Person implements Serializable {
#Id
#Column(name = "id", unique = true, nullable = false, updatable = false, columnDefinition = "bigserial")
private Long id;
#OneToMany(cascade = CascadeType.ALL, fetch = FetchType.LAZY, mappedBy = "person", orphanRemoval = true)
private Set<PersonEmail> emails = new HashSet<>();
}
#Entity
#Table(name = "email", schema = "crm")
public final class Email implements Serializable {
#Id
#Column(name = "id", unique = true, nullable = false, updatable = false, columnDefinition = "bigserial")
private Long id;
#Column(name = "email", nullable = false, length = 64, columnDefinition = "varchar(64)")
private String localPart;
#Column(name = "domain", nullable = false, length = 255, columnDefinition = "varchar(255)")
private String domain;
}
#Entity
#Table(name = "person_email", schema = "crm")
public final class PersonEmail implements Serializable {
#EmbeddedId
private PersonEmailId id;
// The mapped objects are fetched lazily.
// This is a choice.
#ToString.Exclude
#MapsId("personId")
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY, optional = false)
private Person person;
#ToString.Exclude
#MapsId("emailId")
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY, optional = false)
private Email email;
// Here's an extra column.
#Column(name = "type", nullable = false, columnDefinition = "email_type_t")
#Convert(converter = EmailType.EmailTypeConverter.class)
private EmailType type;
public final void setPerson(final Person person) {
this.person = person;
id.setPersonId(this.person.getId());
}
public final void setEmail(final Email email) {
this.email = email;
id.setEmailId(this.email.getId());
}
#Embeddable
public static final class PersonEmailId implements Serializable {
#Column(name = "person_id", nullable = false, insertable = false, updatable = false, columnDefinition = "bigint")
private Long personId;
#Column(name = "email_id", nullable = false, insertable = false, updatable = false, columnDefinition = "bigint")
private Long emailId;
}

HIbernate ignore fetching data from OnetoMany field

I would like to ignore #OnetoMany field in my entity. fetch data need to get actual fields but don't want to fire query to dependent table. But deleting data from parent table needs deletion from dependent table
I have tried #Transient that ignores but the delete is also being ignored. Is there any other option to tell JPA not to fetch data from childs table when i call the parent entity?
#Entity
Table(name = "User")
public class UserEntity implements Serializable {
#Id
#Column(name = "id")
private int id;
#Column(name = "SERIAL", unique = true, nullable = false)
private String serial;
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "serialBySerialId", cascade = CascadeType.ALL)
private Set<UserActionEntity> userActionsById;
}
#Table(name = "user_action")
public class UserActionEntity implements Serializable {
#Id
#Column(name = "id")
private int id;
#Column(name = "action")
private String action;
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "USER_ID", referencedColumnName = "ID", nullable = false)
private UserEntity userByUserId;

If you don't want to fire query to dependent table, you can use (fetch = FetchType.LAZY) on UserActionEntity property.
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "serialBySerialId", cascade = CascadeType.ALL, fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
private Set<UserActionEntity> userActionsById;

Jpa: delete dependents instead of updating them

In my application every customer can have several accounts. I have the following data structure (a lot omitted for brevity):
#Entity
#Table(name = "CUSTOMER")
public class Customer {
#Id
#Column(length = 36, name = "CUSTOMER_ID", nullable = false, unique = true)
private String id;
#OneToMany
#JoinColumn(name = "OWNER_ID", referencedColumnName = "CUSTOMER_ID")
private List<Account> accounts;
}
#Entity
#Table(name = "ACCOUNT")
public class Account {
#Id
#Column(length = 36, name = "ACCOUNT_ID", nullable = false, unique = true)
private String id;
#Column(name = "OWNER_ID", nullable = false)
private String ownerId;
}
If I use JPA to delete a Customer, such as
entityManager.remove(customer);
it tries to update the related ACCOUNT.OWNER_ID fields with null. OWNER_ID is not nullable, so it throws a JDBCException and rolls back the transaction.
What I need to achieve is that the related ACCOUNT rows get deleted (if any). How can I do that?
Thank you
Update: I tried it with
#OneToMany(cascade = CascadeType.ALL, orphanRemoval = true)
but it does not change the behavior: still tries to update with null.

I think you need to be using cascading in order to remove the child elements. Try this:
#OneToMany(cascade = CascadeType.ALL)
#JoinColumn(name = "OWNER_ID", referencedColumnName = "CUSTOMER_ID")
private List<Account> accounts;
You should also reference the Customer in your account by a ManyToOne relationship and not the String id. I think this should solve your issue:
#Column(name = "OWNER_ID", nullable = false)
#ManyToOne
private Customer owner;

What hibernate / jpa annotation is required

I am trying to create a new User(entity1) - it has reference to a Group (entity2) via a link table Member (entity3)
A user has a Set of groups as a class variable.
When i create my user object i want to say this user will be a member of group n (there are pre defined users that are linked to by id (1,2,3,4,5,6...) each group has some associated data in the table.
Whenever I create my user object as follows;
User user = new User();
user.setActive(1);
user.setCrby("me");
user.setUsername("username");
user.setCrdate("2016-06-20 12:42:53.610");
user.setCrwsref("...");
user.setModby("...");
user.setModdate("2016-06-20 12:42:53.610");
user.setModswref("..");
user.setBackground("Y");
user.setPassword("password");
user.setFullName("me");
Group group = new Group();
group.setId(1);
Group group2 = new Group();
group2.setId(2);
Set<Group> sets = new HashSet<Group>();
sets.add(group);
sets.add(group2);
user.setGroups(sets);
userDao.addUser(user);
I keep getting errors telling me that certain columns cannot be null. What I actually want to happen here is not to be doing an insert in to the group table but associating a user to a line in the group table. Is there a particular way I can prevent the columns in the group table being modified? I think I need to modify the mappings between the link table - this is how much pojos link right now
User
#Entity
#Table(name = "user")
public class User
{
#Id
#GeneratedValue
#Column(name = "id")
private int id;
#Column(name = "username")
private String username;
#Column(name = "password")
private String password;
#OneToMany(cascade = CascadeType.ALL, fetch = FetchType.EAGER)
#JoinTable(name = "zmember", joinColumns = {#JoinColumn(name = "username")}, inverseJoinColumns = {#JoinColumn(name = "id")})
private Set<Group> groups = new HashSet<Group>(0);
Member link table
#Entity
#Table(name = "member")
public class Member implements Serializable
{
#Id
#GeneratedValue
#Column(name = "id")
private int id;
#Id
#Column(name = "sgpid")
private int sgpid;
#Column(name = "username")
private String memberUsername;
Group
#Entity
#Table(name = "group")
public class Group
{
#Id
#GeneratedValue
#Column(name = "id")
private int id;
What is happening is there is no association to the link Member table so ideally should User have a set of member objects rather than a set of groups?
Thanks - this was quite hard to explain so sorry if it is hard to understand

This is a typical case for the #ManyToMany annotation. See for example:
https://dzone.com/tutorials/java/hibernate/hibernate-example/hibernate-mapping-many-to-many-using-annotations-1.html

The relationship from User to Group is essentially ManyToMany. You could model this is using the #ManyToMany annotation however one drawback with this approach is you cannot save additional information about the group in the join table such as 'date_joined'.
See: https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Java_Persistence/ManyToMany#ManyToMany
Using this approach you would not need the Join entity Member and the relationship on User would look like:
#ManyToMany(cascade = CascadeType.ALL, fetch = FetchType.EAGER)
#JoinTable(name = "zmember", joinColumns = {#JoinColumn(name = "member_id", referencedColumnName = "id")}, inverseJoinColumns = {#JoinColumn(name = "group_id", referencedColumnName = "id")})
private Set<Group> groups = new HashSet<Group>(0);
The alternative to using #ManyToMany is to use a Join entity Member(ship) as you have done. This would allow you to save additional data about the relationship (by defining additional field mappings in the Join entity).
In this case the mappings would look like:
User:
public class User{
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "user", cascade = CascadeType.ALL, fetch = FetchType.EAGER)
private Set<Membership> memberships = new HashSet<Membership>(0);
//if required, you can 'hide' the join entity from client code by
//encapsulating add remove operations etc.
public void addToGroup(Group group){
Membership membershup = new Membership();
membership.setUser(this);
membership.setGroup(group);
memberships.add(membership);
)
public Set<Groupp> getGroups(){
//iterate memberships and build collection of groups
}
}
Membership:
public class Membership{
#Id
#GeneratedValue
#Column(name = "id")
private int id;
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "user_id")
private Member member;
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "group_id")
private Group group;
}
Group:
#Entity
#Table(name = "group")
public class Group
{
#Id
#GeneratedValue
#Column(name = "id")
private int id;
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "group", cascade = CascadeType.ALL, fetch = FetchType.EAGER)
private Set<Membership> memberships = new HashSet<Membership>(0);
}

JPA merge results in duplicate entry of foreign entity

QUESTIONS:
Does anyone know how to merge without having EntityManager trying to re-insert the foreign entity?
SCENARIO:
Just to set up a scenario that closely matches my case: I have two entities
#Entity
#Table(name = "login", catalog = "friends", uniqueConstraints =
#UniqueConstraint(columnNames = "username"))
public class Login implements java.io.Serializable{
private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = IDENTITY)
#Column(name = "id", unique = true, nullable = false)
private Integer id;
#Column(name = "username", unique = true, nullable = false, length = 50)
private String username;
#Column(name = "password", nullable = false, length = 250)
private String password;
}
#Entity
#Table(name = "friendshiptype", catalog = "friends")
public class FriendshipType implements java.io.Serializable{
private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = IDENTITY)
#Column(name = "id", unique = true, nullable = false)
private Integer id;
#OneToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinColumn(name = "username")
private Login login;
#Column(name = "type", unique = true, length = 32)
private String type;
...//other fields go here
}
Both the Login entity and the FriendshipType entity are persisted to the database separately. Then, later, I need to merge a Login row with a FriendshipType row. When I call entityManager.merge(friendship), it tries to insert a new Login which of course results in the following error
Internal Exception: com.mysql.jdbc.exceptions.jdbc4.MySQLIntegrityConstraintViolationException: Duplicate entry 'myUserName1350319637687' for key 'username'
Error Code: 1062
Call: INSERT INTO friends.login (password, username) VALUES (?, ?)
My question, again, is how do I merge two objects without having enityManager trying to reinsert the foreign object?

Here is how I solve the problem. I finally figure the reason the merge is not resolving is because the login.id is auto generated by JPA. So since I really don't need an auto-generated id field, I remove it from the schema and use username as the #id field:
#Entity
#Table(name = "login", catalog = "friends", uniqueConstraints =
#UniqueConstraint(columnNames = "username"))
public class Login implements java.io.Serializable{
private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;
#Id
#Column(name = "username", unique = true, nullable = false, length = 50)
private String username;
#Column(name = "password", nullable = false, length = 250)
private String password;
}
Another solution that occurred to me, which I didn't implement but may help someone else, should they need to have an auto-generated id field.
Instead of creating an instance of Login for the merger, get the instance from the database. What I mean is, instead of
Login login = new Login(); login.setUsername(username); login.setPassword(password);
Do rather
Login login = loginDao.getByUsername(username);
That way, a new id field is not generated making the entity seem different.
Thanks and up-votes to everyone for helping, especially to #mijer for being so patient.

You can make your #JoinColumn non updatable:
#JoinColumn(name = "login_id", updatable = false) // or
#JoinColumn(name = "username", referencedColumnName = "username", updatable= false)
Or try to refresh / fetch your Login entity again before merging the FriendshipType:
// either this
entityManager.refresh(friendship.getLogin());
// or this
final Login login = entityManager
.getReference(Login.class, friendship.getLogin().getId());
friendship.setLogin(login);
// and then
entityManager.merge(friendship);
But, as other suggested I belive that FriendshipType would be better represented by a #ManyToOne relationship or maybe by a Embeddable or ElementCollection
Update
Yet another option is to change the owning side:
public class Login implements java.io.Serializable {
#OneToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinColumn(name = "friendshiptype_id")
private FriendshipType friendshipType;
// Other stuff
}
public class FriendshipType implements java.io.Serializable {
#OneToOne(fetch=FetchType.LAZY, mappedBy="friendshipType")
private Login login;
// Other stuff
}
This will affect your data model (login table will have a friendshiptype_id column instead of the other way around), but will prevent the errors that you are getting, since relationships are always maintained by the owning side.

Have you tried cascade=MERGE? I.e.
#OneToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY, cascade=CascadeType.MERGE)
#JoinColumn(name = "username")
private Login login;
UPDATE
Another possible option is to use #ManyToOne (it's save as the association is unique)
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY, cascade=CascadeType.MERGE)
#JoinColumn(name = "username")
private Login login;

You can do it with your original #Id setup. i.e.
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = IDENTITY)
#Column(name = "id", unique = true, nullable = false)
private Integer id;
You can, but you don't need to change to:
#Id
#Column(name = "username", unique = true, nullable = false, length = 50)
private String username;
The trick is you must start by loading from the DB, via em.find(...) or em.createQuery(...). Then the id is guaranteed to be populated with the right value from the DB.
Then you can detach the entity by ending a transaction (for a transaction-scoped entity manager in a session bean), or by calling em.detach(ent) or em.clear(), or by serialising the entity and passing it over the network.
Then you can update the entity, all the while, keeping the original id value.
Then you can call em.merge(ent) and you will still have the correct id. However, I believe the entity must already pre-exist in the persistent context of the entity manager at this instant, otherwise it will think that you have a new entity (with manually populated id), and try to INSERT on transaction flush/commit.
So the second trick is to ensure the entity is loaded at the point of the merge (via em.find(...) or em.query(...) again, if you have a new persistent context and not the original).
:-)