I have a JPA/EclipseLink model with multiple parameters whose values are set as defaults by the PostgreSQL database. Specifically, I have:
An id column of type SERIAL which auto-increments when new rows are added
A created_at column of type TIMESTAMP which defaults to now()
My model looks like this:
import javax.persistence.*;
#Entity
#Table(name="entity")
#NamedQuery(name="Entity.findAll", query="SELECT e from Entity e")
public class Entity {
#Id #GeneratedValue(strategy=GenerationType.IDENTITY)
private Integer id;
#Column(name="created_at")
private java.sql.Timestamp createdAt;
// constructor, getters, and setters
}
When I try to insert a row with persist() in javax.persistence.EntityManager, the insertion fails because a NULL value is being set for the created_at column. Rather than inserting NULL, I want to simply not insert anything into that column and allow PostgreSQL to set it to now(). Essentially, I would like to use #GeneratedValue on createdAt, but that annotation is only for primary keys and cannot be used on multiple attributes. Is there another annotation I can use that will accomplish this?
You may want insertable=false in the Column annotation:
#Column(name="created_at", insertable=false)
private java.sql.Timestamp createdAt;
From: http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/5/api/javax/persistence/Column.html
boolean insertable
(Optional) Whether the column is included in SQL INSERT statements generated by the persistence provide
You can add #DynamicInsert on your entity class. The insert statement will include null fields when without this annotation. Also, you can add # DynamicUpdate when executing the update statement.
#Entity
#DynamicInsert
#DynamicUpdate
#Table(name="entity")
#NamedQuery(name="Entity.findAll", query="SELECT e from Entity e")
public class Entity {
#Id #GeneratedValue(strategy=GenerationType.IDENTITY)
private Integer id;
#Column(name="created_at")
private java.sql.Timestamp createdAt;
// constructor, getters, and setters
}
As mentioned in another answer, JPA providers will set the value on insert if you have it marked as insertable=true (the default). This occurs with many providers even if null as it allows statement reuse.
Just excluding it from the statement though might not be what you want, as to have the value in your entity (and in the cache) will require refreshing. EclipseLink though has #ReturningInsert which allows EclipseLink to update the entity with the value in the database. Unfortunately support is only for Oracle - other databases require use of stored procedures to return run the insert and return the value.
Related
I'm having some problems with my PostgreSQL database columns on some tables.
If I declare a column of String with a name like a_column_name Hibernate accepts the column of the table with the name a_column_name.
But my problem comes when I declare the column type to Integer or BigDecimal. At start, Hibernate creates a new column of type int4 or numeric(19, 2) with a name like acolumnname with NULL's.
Hibernate: alter table t_myTable add column acolumnname int4
or
Hibernate: alter table t_myTable add column acolumnname numeric(19, 2)
I've tried to set the name-strategy on the config file of Spring boot:
jpa:
show-sql: true
hibernate:
ddl-auto: update
properties:
hibernate.cache.use_second_level_cache: false
hibernate.cache.use_query_cache: false
hibernate.generate_statistics: true
naming.physical-strategy: PhysicalNamingStrategyStandardImpl
But with no result...
So my question is why Hibernate accepts the column name when it's of String type but doesn't like it when it's Integer or BigDecimal.
Regards.
---- Update 1 ----
After search the Entity to post here the code as Veselin Davidov asked, I've noticed that some columns are accepted while others not.
The entities are created from a company framework that parses a JSON with the DB structure (tables, fields, type of fields...) and generates the JAVA entity class. So after see the answer from SAM I've changed the code of the Entity template to add a #Column(name = "your_column_name"). Now, when Hibernate starts, it doesn't add the columns with the wrong names and uses the DB columns.
if your Hibernate entity class is like the following:
#Entity
public class Registration{
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO)
private int id;
#Column
#Basic
private String name;
// getters and setters
}
then your registration table will have fields named with "id" and "name" as you have used auto-ddl=update. To avoid that you can specify the column names with #Column(name = "your_column_name") like below:
#Table(name = "registration")
#Entity
public class Registration{
#Id
#Column(name = "r_id")
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO)
private int id;
#Basic
#Column(name = "r_name")
private String name;
// getters and setters
}
If you are using Intellij IDEA then the IDE can generate the required Entity class.
You can go to your persistence tab -> right-click on your project name -> Generate Persistence Mapping -> By Database Schema. Then select the tables whose Entity you want to generate. Voila everything comes with ease.
Now coming to your problem, in your Entity class if you set some filed with Integer type then it will update your table to int4 and with allow null. The BigDecimal is also same numeric(10,2) with allow null. To avoid allow null in your database use primitive type int and double.
I've got the following entity:
#Entity
#Table(name = "ONE")
#SecondaryTable(name = "VIEW_TWO", pkJoinColumns = #PrimaryKeyJoinColumn(name="ONE_ID"))
public class CpBracket {
#Id
private Long id;
#Column(name="progress", table="VIEW_TWO", updatable = false, insertable = false)
private int progress = 0;
(...)
}
As you see, this entity uses table ONE and (read only) view VIEW_TWO. When I'm persisting the entity, hibernate is performing insert into view:
insert into VIEW_TWO (ONE_ID) values (?)
It is ignoring the non-updatable and non-insertable column progress (that's good) and it is still trying to insert value of ONE_ID column. As far as I know, the annotation #PrimaryKeyJoinColumn marks selected column as insertable=false and updatable=false.
How can I prevent hibernate from inserting rows into secondary table (view)?
As far as I know, the annotation #PrimaryKeyJoinColumn marks selected
column as insertable=false and updatable=false.
I do not believe this can be the case: how then do we get records inserted into the #SecondaryTable when it is an actual table rather than a view?
As neither #SecondaryTable or #PrimarykeyJoinColumn have a means to prevent insert then it would appear that your original solution is not going to work and an alternative is required.
One option is to map VIEW_TWO as an #Entity and link to your class CPBracket as a #OneToOne relationship with cascade options set to none.
#Entity
#Table(name ="VIEW_TWO")
private CpBracketSummaryData(){
}
#Entity
#Table(name = "ONE")
public class CpBracket {
#OneToOne
#PrimaryKeyJoinColumn
private CPBracketSummaryData summaryData;
public int getSomeValue(){
return summaryData.getSomeValue();
}
}
The second option would be to use the non JPA compliant, Hibernate specific #Formula annotation.
#Entity
#Table(name = "ONE")
public class CpBracket {
#Formula("native sql query")
private int someValue;
}
Update October 2016
I have revisited this in both Hibernate 4.3.10.Final and 5.1.0.Final and it is possible to have the view as a #SecondaryTable without the insert: if you have the correct mappings.
Scenario 1
Load an entity for edit and do not touch any fields mapped to the secondary table. No update is issued to the secondary table
Scenario 2
Create and save a new entity and do not set any fields mapped to the secondary table. No insert is issued for the secondary table
Scenario 3
Create or update an entity including a field mapped to a secondary table and where this field is marked as insertable = false and updateable = false. An insert is made to the secondary table only for the ID field -the behaviour reported in the original question.
The issue with the mapping in the original question is the fact that the secondary table field is a primitive type and therefore when saving a new entity Hibernate does think a record has to be written to the secondary table with a value of zero.
#Column(name="progress", table="VIEW_TWO", updatable = false, insertable = false)
private int progress = 0;
The solution then is to replace primitives with the corresponding wrapper types and leave them as null. Then when saving a new record there is nothing to write to the secondary table and no insert will be made:
#Column(name="progress", table="VIEW_TWO")
private Integer progress;
I solved a similar problem with #SecondaryTable, which was a database view. So maybe it will help someone else.
The problem was on cascade delete to #SecondaryTable, when record from primary table was deleted.
As a solution, I implemented RULE on view for delete
CREATE RULE on_delete AS ON DELETE TO my_view DO INSTEAD(
select 1;
)
Similar solution can be used for INSERT and UPDATE operation on view.
In a Spring MVC application using Hibernate and MySQL, I have an abstract superclass BaseEntity that manages the values of the IDs for all the other entities in the model. The id field uses #GeneratedValue. I am encountering a problem whenever my code tries to save any of the subclasses that extend BaseEntity. The problem comes with the choice of GenerationType for the #GeneratedValue.
At every place in my code where a subclass of BaseEntity tries to save to the underlying MySQL database, I get the following error:
ERROR SqlExceptionHelper - Table 'docbd.hibernate_sequences' doesn't exist
I have read many postings about this on SO and on google, but they either deal with other databases (not MySQL) or they do not deal with abstract superclasses. I cannot solve the problem by using GenerationType.IDENTITY because I am using an abstract superclass to manage id fields for all entities in the model. Similarly, I cannot use GenerationType.SEQUENCE because MySQL does not support sequences.
So how do I solve this problem?
Here is the code for BaseEntity.java:
#Entity
#Inheritance(strategy = InheritanceType.TABLE_PER_CLASS)
public abstract class BaseEntity {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.TABLE)
protected Integer id;
public void setId(Integer id) {this.id = id;}
public Integer getId() {return id;}
public boolean isNew() {return (this.id == null);}
}
Here is an example of the code for one of the entities that extends BaseEntity:
#Entity
#Table(name = "ccd")
public class CCD extends BaseEntity{
//other stuff
}
Here is the DDL:
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS ccd(
id int(11) UNSIGNED NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT PRIMARY KEY,
#other stuff
)engine=InnoDB;SHOW WARNINGS;
Here is the JPQL code in the DAO:
#Override
#Transactional
public void saveCCD(CCD ccd) {
if (ccd.getId() == null) {
System.out.println("[[[[[[[[[[[[ about to persist CCD ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]");
this.em.persist(ccd);
this.em.flush();
}
else {
System.out.println("]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] about to merge CCD [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[");
this.em.merge(ccd);
this.em.flush();
}
}
EDIT:
The reason I cannot use #MappedSuperClass in this situation is that I need to have ManyToOne relationships that allow for multiple subtypes to be used interchangeably. Look at the AccessLog class below as an example. It has an actor_entity and a target_entity. There can be many types of actor entities and many types of target entities, but they all inherit from BaseEntity. This inheritance enables the underlying accesslogs data table in MySQL to just have one actor_entity_id field and just one target_entity_id field instead of having to have several fields for each. When I change #Entity above BaseEntity to #MappedSuperClass, a different error gets thrown indicating that AccessLog cannot find BaseEntity. BaseEntity needs #Entity annotation in order for AccessLog to have polymorphic properties.
#Entity
#Table(name = "accesslogs")
public class AccessLog extends BaseEntity{
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "actorentity_id")
private BaseEntity actor_entity;
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "targetentity_id")
private BaseEntity target_entity;
#Column(name="action_code")
private String action;
//getters, setters, & other stuff
}
SECOND EDIT:
As per JBNizet's suggestion, I created a hibernate_sequences table as follows:
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS hibernate_sequences(
sequence_next_hi_value int(11) UNSIGNED NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT PRIMARY KEY
)engine=InnoDB;SHOW WARNINGS;
But now I am getting the following error:
Caused by: com.mysql.jdbc.exceptions.jdbc4.MySQLSyntaxErrorException: Unknown column 'sequence_name' in 'where clause'
Here is the hibernate sql causing the error, followed by the next 2 lines of the stack trace:
Hibernate: select sequence_next_hi_value from hibernate_sequences where sequence_name = 'BaseEntity' for update
ERROR MultipleHiLoPerTableGenerator - HHH000351: Could not read or init a hi value
com.mysql.jdbc.exceptions.jdbc4.MySQLSyntaxErrorException: Unknown column 'sequence_name' in 'where clause'
How do I resolve this?
What a mess... AUTO_INCREMENT is MySQL's hidden sequence. The radical problem is that MySQL can not insert and return the PK at the same time, but Hibernate need this while INSERTing a new Entity.
The Problems you run into:
If Hibernate save a new Entity, he try to immerdentelly set the id to the new EntityBean. Therefore hibernate must read what ID will the Database use before hibernate save the new Tuple to the Table.
If you have multiple Servers who access the database, you shall let hibernate's session-factory decide to use the built-in sequence(AUTO-INCREMENT) or let hibernate decide (GenerationType.AUTO/GenerationType.IDENTITY) how large the open range of reserved PK's is (Job of a DB-Architect). (We have about 20 servers to one Database, so on a good-used table we use a PK-distance of +100). If only one server have access to the database GenerationType.TABLE shall be correct.
Hibernate must calculate the next id by yourself using max(*)+1 but:
What if two requests ask for max(*)+1 at the same time/with the same result? Right: The last try to insert will fail.
So you need to have a Table LAST_IDS in the database who stores the last Table-PK's. If you like to add one, you must do this steps:
Start read-optimistic transaction.
SELECT MAX(address_id) FROM LAST_IDS
store the maximum in a java-variable i.e.: $OldID.
$NewID = $OldID + 1. (+100 in pessimistic-lock)
UPDATE LAST_IDS SET address_id= $newID WHERE address_id= $oldID?
commit the read-optimistic transaction.
if commit was successfull, store $newID to setID() in the HibernateBean you like to save.
Finally let Hibernate call the insert.
This is the only way i know.
BTW: Hibernate-Entitys shall only use inheritance if the Database support inheritance between tables like PostgreSQL or Oracle.
Because you use the TABLE identifier generator you need to have that table created. If you are not using the enhanced identifier generators, chances are you are going to use the MultipleHiLoPerTableGenerator.
The MultipleHiLoPerTableGenerator can use one table for all table identifier generators.
My suggestion is to grab the table ddl from your integration tests, in case you use hbmddl to build the test schema. If you use flyway or liquibase for testing, you can add a maven plugin to generate the ddl schema.
Once you have the schema, you need to take the exact create table command and make add it to your MySQL database.
I am trying to establish a relationship between 2 entities which would be zero-to-one. That is, the Parent can be saved without the associated Child entity and also along with the assoicated Child.
Following are the 2 Entity classes...
Employee (Parent)
public class Employee {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO)
private Long id;
#Column(name="EMP_NAME")
private String name;
#PrimaryKeyJoinColumn
#OneToOne(cascade = {CascadeType.ALL})
private EmployeeInfo info;
#Column(name="EMP_ENUM")
private Integer enumId;
EmployeeInfo (Child)
public class EmployeeInfo {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy=GenerationType.AUTO)
private Long id;
#Column(name="EMPLOYEE_EMAIL")
private String email;
With such kind of a relation and id column of the only Parent (Employee) table set to AUTO INCREMENT in MySql DB, the problem is that while saving a Parent->Child object graph, I get the following exception
org.springframework.orm.hibernate3.HibernateJdbcException: JDBC exception on Hibernate data access: SQLException for SQL [insert into EMP_INFO
Caused by: java.sql.SQLException: Field 'id' doesn't have a default value
I tried setting the Child Table's Id property to AUTO INCREMENT in the DB , and the persistence of such a Parent->Child object graph is successful.
However, the problem described here surfaces, because I have a scenario in which I would like to save the parent (Employee) object without the associated EmpInfo object, and hence do NOT want to have AUTO INCREMENT on the Child's id column.
One solution could be not use the PrimaryKeyJoinColumn, but use a particular JoinColumn, but that adds an unnecessary column to my existing Table.
Has anyone come across such a problem? If yes, any pointers would be much helpful.
Finally, I got it working thanks to Pascal and some googling from my side. Apparently, I cannot use the Native key generator for such relationships where the parent can exist without the child (optional = true).
The thing that worked finally was the following, leaving me the downside of having to deal with Hibernate specific annotation (#GenericGenerator) and also having to make-do with bi-directional relationships instead of the unidirectional that I wanted.
Employee (Parent) class remains unchanged as above. It has AUTO INCREMENT on the Id column.
As for the child class (EmployeeInfo) it changed to the following, and again WITHOUT having the AUTO INCREMENT set on the Id column.
#Table(name="EMP_INFO")
#Entity
public class EmployeeInfo {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(generator="foreign")
#GenericGenerator(name="foreign", strategy = "foreign", parameters={
#Parameter(name="property", value="verifInfo")})
private Long id;
#OneToOne(optional=false)
#JoinColumn (name="id")
private Employee emp;
#Column(name="EMPLOYEE_EMAIL")
private String email;
This helped me achieve what I wanted but on the downside, GenericGenerator is not a JPA annotation, it is a hibernate annotation, and sadly I have to make do with that as of now because JPA does not currently support this(or any similar) annotation.
Anyway, it helps to get through such cases :-)
I have a scenario in which I would like to save the parent (Employee) object without the associated EmpInfo object.
The optional attribute of a OneToOne is true by default, which is what you want.
However, you are somehow misusing the #PrimaryKeyJoinColumn here (well, it actually depends on what you really want to achieve but your current combination of annotations is not correct).
IF you want to map a OneToOne with a shared primary-key, use the #PrimaryKeyJoinColumn. But in that case, don't use a GeneratedValue on EmployeeInfo and set the id manually or, if you don't want to set it manually, use the Hibernate specific foreign generator that I already mentioned in your previous question. Check also the related question mentioned below.
And IF you do not want to use a shared primary key (like in your current code since you're trying to get the id generated by the database), then do not use the PrimaryKeyJoinColumn.
You have to make a choice.
References
JPA 1.0 specification:
9.1.32 PrimaryKeyJoinColumn Annotation
Related question
JPA Hibernate One-to-One relationship.
I'm currently using Eclipselink, but I know now days most JPA implementations have been pretty standardized. Is there a native way to map a JPA entity to a view? I am not looking to insert/update, but the question is really how to handle the #Id annotation. Every entity in the JPA world must have an ID field, but many of the views I have created do not conform to this. Is there native support for this in the JPA or do I need to use hacks to get it to work? I've searched a lot and found very little information about doing this.
While using the #Id annotation with fields of directly supported types is not the only way to specify an entity's identity (see #IdClass with multiple #Id annotations or #EmbeddedId with #Embedded), the JPA specification requires a primary key for each entity.
That said, you don't need entities to use JPA with database views. As mapping to a view is no different from mapping to a table from an SQL perspective, you could still use native queries (createNativeQuery on EntityManager) to retrieve scalar values instead.
I've been looking into this myself, and I've found a hack that I'm not 100% certain works but that looks promising.
In my case, I have a FK column in the view that can effectively function as a PK -- any given instance of that foreign object can only occur once in the view. I defined two objects off of that one field: one is designated the ID and represents the raw value of the field, and the other is designated read-only and represents the object being referred to.
#Id
#Column(name = "foreignid", unique = true, nullable = false)
public Long getForeignId() {
...
#OneToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "foreignid", insertable=false, updatable=false)
public ForeignObject getForeignObject() {
...
Like I said, I'm not 100% sure on this one (and I'll just delete this answer if it turns out not to work), but it got my code past a particular crash point.
Dunno if it applies to your specific situation, though. And there's an excellent chance that after 11 months, you no longer care. :-) What the hell, that "Necromancer" badge doesn't just earn itself....
In my view I have a "unique" id, so I mapped it as the Entity id.
It works very well:
#Entity
#Table(name="table")
#NamedQuery(name="Table.findAll", query="SELECT n FROM Table n")
public class Table implements Serializable {
private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;
#Id
#Column(name="column_a")
private int columnA;
JPA - 2.5.4
CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW IF NOT EXISTS needed_article as select product_id, count(product_id) as count from product_article group by product_id;
CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW IF NOT EXISTS available_article as select product_id, count(product_id) as count from article a inner join product_article p
on a.id = p.article_id and a.stock >= p.amount_of group by product_id;
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX productId_available_article ON available_article (product_Id);
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX productId_needed_article ON needed_article (product_Id);
Entity.java
#Entity
#Immutable // hibernate import
#Getter
#Setter
public class NeededArticle {
#Id
Integer productId;
Integer count;
}
Repository.java
#Repository
public interface AvailableProductRepository extends CrudRepository<AvailableArticle, Integer> {
#Query("select available.productId from AvailableArticle available, NeededArticle needed where available.productId = needed.productId and available.count = needed.count")
List<Integer> availableProduct();