In a legacy database, I have three tables: Users, Workgroups, and UsersWorkgroup. UsersWorkgroup stores what role a user has in a workgroup.
Here are the relevant code snippets:
#Entity
#Table(name = "users_workgroup")
public class UsersWorkgroup implements Serializable {
private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;
#EmbeddedId
protected UsersWorkgroupPK usersWorkgroupPK;
#JoinColumn(name = "idworkgroup", referencedColumnName = "idworkgroup")
#ManyToOne(optional = false)
private Workgroup workgroup;
#JoinColumn(name = "user_name", referencedColumnName = "user_name")
#ManyToOne(optional = false)
private Users users;
#Column(name = "role")
private Integer role;
#Embeddable
public class UsersWorkgroupPK implements Serializable {
#Basic(optional = false)
#Column(name = "idworkgroup", insertable=false, updatable=false)
private int idworkgroup;
#Basic(optional = false)
#Column(name = "user_name", insertable=false, updatable=false)
private String userName;
#Entity
#Table(name = "workgroup")
public class Workgroup implements Serializable {
private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY)
#Basic(optional = false)
#Column(name = "idworkgroup")
private Integer idworkgroup;
#Column(name = "name")
private String name;
#OneToMany(cascade = CascadeType.ALL, mappedBy = "idworkgroup")
private Collection<UsersWorkgroup> usersWorkgroupCollection;
And of course, problem is, it doesn't work.
Currently I get this exception:
Exception Description: An incompatible
mapping has been encountered between
[class entity.Workgroup] and [class
entity.UsersWorkgroup]. This usually
occurs when the cardinality of a
mapping does not correspond with the
cardinality of its backpointer.
Which I don't understand since OneToMany should match ManyToOne... Or is it a ManyToMany relationship? If I switch to #ManyToMany, I get this:
Exception Description: The target
entity of the relationship attribute
[workgroup] on the class [class
com.ericsson.rsg.ejb.entity.UsersWorkgroup]
cannot be determined. When not using
generics, ensure the target entity is
defined on the relationship mapping.
I'm trying to understand compound keys (embedded), but all the examples I could find have only simple columns that are not foreign keys (but that's the whole point of a compound key, isn't it?). Can the UsersWorkgroup table secretly be a join table?
Should I declare the PK class as a strict POJO class? Or should I put the #JoinColumn annotations in the PK class? How do I refer to the columns within the compound key from another table? Should I initialize the PK object in the refering class constructor, or is it not necessary?
I feel stuck completely.
First of all, I think your relation is a Many To Many, as a user can be in many groups, and a group can have many users (or I would assume so).
Second, as far as I know you have to reference both id_workgroup and user_name as JoinColumns, because they are part of the PK and a unit, so both should be referenced.
Also, I see the "equals" and "hashCode" methods missing from your embedded PK, as well as the getters/setters. I believe they are mandatory.
Your mapping looks fine except for mappedBy - it should be a property name, not a column name:
#OneToMany(cascade = CascadeType.ALL, mappedBy = "workgroup")
private Collection<UsersWorkgroup> usersWorkgroupCollection;
Related
I have a parent entity 'contracts' that has a one-to-one relation with another entity 'child-contract'. the interesting thing is that the mapping field ('contract_number')id not a primary key-foreign key but is rather a unique field in both the tables. Also it is possible for a contracts to not have any child contract altogether. With this configuration I have observed hibernate to generate 1 additional query every time a contracts does not have a child-contract. I filed this behavior very strange. Is there a way to stop these unnecessary query generation or have I got something wrong.
below is a piece of my code configuration.
#Data
#Entity
#Table(name = "contracts")
public class Contracts implements Serializable {
#Id
#JsonIgnore
#Column(name = "id")
private String id;
#JsonProperty("contract_number")
#Column(name = "contract_number")
private String contractNumber;
#OneToOne(fetch=FetchType.EAGER)
#Fetch(FetchMode.JOIN)
#JsonProperty("crm_contracts")
#JoinColumn(name = "contract_number", referencedColumnName = "contract_number")
private ChildContract childContract ;
}
#Data
#NoArgsConstructor
#Entity
#Table(name = "child_contract")
#BatchSize(size=1000)
public class ChildContract implements Serializable {
private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;
#Id
#JsonProperty("id")
#Column(name = "id")
private String id;
#JsonProperty("contract_number")
#Column(name = "contract_number")
private String contractNumber;
}
Please help.
Thank-you
You can use NamedEntityGraph to solve multiple query problem.
#NamedEntityGraph(name = "graph.Contracts.CRMContracts", attributeNodes = {
#NamedAttributeNode(value = "crmContract") })
Use this on your repository method as
#EntityGraph(value = "graph.Contracts.CRMContracts", type = EntityGraphType.FETCH)
// Your repo method in repository
I have Role class, which is the main entity for User's roles and 2 FK in this table, which are pointed on two dictionaries independently: Privelege and Unit classes.
So it's many (Role) to one (Privelege/Unit) relationships as I take.
Qustions:
Is the Hibernate's mapping in my code correct?
Which class is the "owning side" in my case and why?
In which class should I write #JoinColumn and where mappedBy?
As I have read in other posts: "#JoinColumn annotation is maintained in the class which owns the foreign key."
But in Hibernate's doc I see that mappedBy is used on the owning side (see Example 163. Bidirectional #OneToOne).
4. What will happen if I remove some Role records? If I remove some records from dictionaries will it affect Role's records? Can I override this behavior to disable cascading?
I assume that my "Role" class is the owning side because it has FK pointed on 2 dictionaries. So it owns FK. Therefore I need to use #JoinColumn here as its owning side and mappedBy at two dictionaries, because it's mapped by owning side. Am I right.
Update: is the "owning side" synonym to "parent side"?
Role class
#Entity
#Table(name="ROLES_NEW", schema="MAPP")
public class Role implements GrantedAuthority {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY)
#Column(name = "ID", nullable = false)
private Long id;
#Column(name = "ROLENAME")
private String roleName;
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.EAGER)
#JoinColumn(name = "UNIT_ID")
private Unit unit;
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.EAGER)
#JoinColumn(name = "PRIVELEGE_ID")
private Privelege privelege;
...
}
Privelege class
#Entity
#Table(name="PRIVELEGES", schema="MAPP")
public class Privelege /*implements GrantedAuthority*/ {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY)
#Column(name = "ID", nullable = false)
private Long id;
#Column(name = "PRIVELEGENAME", length = 255, nullable = false)
private String privelegeName;
#Column(name = "descr", length = 255, nullable = false)
private String descr;
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "privelege")
Set<Role> role;
...
}
Unit class
#Entity
#Table(name="UNITS", schema="MAPP")
public class Unit {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY)
#Column(name = "ID", nullable = false)
private Long id;
#Column(name = "UNITNAME")
private String unitname;
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "unit")
Set<Role> role;
...
}
Yes, the child entity owns the relationship, because that's the side the foreign key is on. This mapping is the most efficient in case of #ManyToOne.
Same thing would apply for many-to-many relationships mapped as two bidirectional #ManyToOne. It can also be done with #JoinTable annotation, but this approach is less efficient.
In case of #OneToOne although child (foreign key holder) owns the relationship, the best performance can be obtained, when using #MapsId and #JoinColumn on the parent side. More about that exception can be found here.
When it comes to mappedBy it's simple - it's used when the relationship is bidirectional and on the side #JoinColumn is not (child has #JoinColumn, parent - mappedBy).
I recommend Vlad Mihalcea's blog when it comes to optimal hibernate mapping: one-to-many, many-to-many.
P.S.: Prefer List to Set to map -to-many relationship (source).
How fix next error?
ERROR SchemaExport:484 - HHH000389: Unsuccessful: alter table CATEGORY_RELATIONS add constraint FK2bn4xlg661b5xbx2qnwi1aqv0 foreign key (CATEGORY_RELATIONS_PARENT_ID) references CATEGORY
ERROR SchemaExport:485 - incompatible data types in combination in statement [alter table CATEGORY_RELATIONS add constraint FK2bn4xlg661b5xbx2qnwi1aqv0 foreign key (CATEGORY_RELATIONS_PARENT_ID) references CATEGORY]
hibernate.version 5.0.7.Final
hsqldb.version 2.3.3
Property, used for session factory
hibernate.dialect=org.hibernate.dialect.HSQLDialect
Category
#Entity
#Table(name = "CATEGORY",
indexes = {
#Index(name = "CATEGORY_NAME_INDEX",
columnList = "CATEGORY_NAME")})
public class Category extends JsonNamedModel {
#Id
#Column(name = "CATEGORY_ID")
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO)
private long id;
#Column(name = "CATEGORY_NAME")
private String name;
#Column(name = "CATEGORY_IMAGE")
private String image;
#OneToOne(cascade = CascadeType.REMOVE, fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinTable(name = "CATEGORY_RELATIONS",
joinColumns = {
#JoinColumn(name = "CATEGORY_RELATIONS_CATEGORY_ID", referencedColumnName = "CATEGORY_ID")},
inverseJoinColumns = {
#JoinColumn(name = "CATEGORY_RELATIONS_PARENT_ID", referencedColumnName = "CATEGORY_ID")})
private Category parent;
#OneToMany(cascade = CascadeType.REMOVE, fetch = FetchType.EAGER, mappedBy = "parent")
private List<Category> children;//...
}
CategoryRelations
#Entity
#Table(name = "CATEGORY_RELATIONS")
#IdClass(CategoryRelations.CategoryRelationsPrimaryKey.class)
public class CategoryRelations implements Serializable {
#Id
#Column(name = "CATEGORY_RELATIONS_CATEGORY_ID")
private String categoryId;
#Id
#Column(name = "CATEGORY_RELATIONS_PARENT_ID")
private String parentId;
#Entity
#IdClass(CategoryRelationsPrimaryKey.class)
public static class CategoryRelationsPrimaryKey implements Serializable {
private long categoryId;
private long parentId;
}//...
}
I think it's complaining because your types don't match up. In CATEGORY_RELATIONS you have the key types as String but in CATEGORY you have the primary key as an int. While in actual practice you might only store integer data in both fields, the DB engine can't prove that. There's nothing stopping somebody from putting a non-integer in CATEGORY_RELATIONS.categoryId and making it so the FK could never be satisfied.
Try changing CATEGORY_RELATIONS.categoryId to an int.
And now that I look at it, your PK class shows them as longs. Try switching all of the types in your CategoryRelations object (and possibly the CATEGORY_RELATIONS table) to all be the same types.
I can't propper map DB tables with JPA annotation.
Tables Subject and Place is ManyToMany through JoinTable.
Subject.java
#Entity
#Table(name = "SUBJECT")
public class Subject implements Serializable {
#Id
#Column(name = "SID")
private Integer sid;
#Column(name = "NAME")
private String name;
// getters and setters
}
SubjectPlace.java
#Entity
#Table(name = "SUBJECT_PLACE")
public class SubjectPlace implements Serializable {
#Id
#Column(name = "SPID")
private Integer spid;
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "SUB_KEY") //Subject FK
private Subject subject;
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "PLC_KEY") //Place FK
private Place place;
// getters and setters
}
Place.java
#Entity
#Table(name = "PLACE")
public class Place implements Serializable {
#Id
#Column(name = "PID")
private Integer pid;
#Column(name = "NAME")
private String name;
#ManyToMany(fetch = FetchType.LAZY, cascade = CascadeType.PERSIST)
#JoinTable(name = "SUBJECT_PLACE",
joinColumns = { #JoinColumn(name = "PLC_KEY", nullable = false, updatable = false) },
inverseJoinColumns = { #JoinColumn(name = "SUB_KEY", nullable = false, updatable = false) })
private Set<Subject> subjects;
// getters and setters
}
But than I need to link Person with Subject in selected Places. I mean that each Place has its own collection of Subject. And a Person have link to Subject whitch resides in particular Place.
like This:
Subject (M) -- (M) Place through JoinTable Subject (1) -- (M) Subject_Place (M) -- (1) Place
Person (M) -- (M) Subject_Place through JoinTable Person (1) -- (M) Person_Subject_Place (M) -- (1) Subject_Place
Person.java
#Entity
#Table(name = "PERSON")
public class Person implements Serializable {
#Id
#Column(name = "PRSID")
private Integer prsid;
#Column(name = "NAME")
private String name;
// How to annotate this code?
// I experience problem in this part of code
#OneToMany
#JoinColumn(name="SPID_KEY")
private List<SubjectPlace> subjectPlaces;
// getters and setters
}
PersonSubjectPlace.java
#Entity
#Table(name = "PERSON_SUBJECT_PLACE")
public class PersonSubjectPlace implements Serializable {
#Id
#Column(name = "PSPID") // Person_Subject_Place ID
private Integer pspid;
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "PER_KEY") //Person FK
private Person person;
// How to annotate this code?
// I experience problem in this part of code
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "SPID_KEY") //Subject_Place FK
private SubjectPlace subjectPlace;
// getters and setters
}
And when I try so get Persons and its Subjects, I get this error:
Caused by: org.hibernate.MappingException: Foreign key (FK2C3B79384AABC975:PERSON_SUBJECT_PLACE [SPID_KEY])) must have same number of columns as the referenced primary key (SUBJECT_PLACE [PLC_KEY,SUB_KEY])
What, How shoul I map?
In your OneToMany mapping you don't need to specify the foreign key, you just need to use mappedBy property to refer your mapping object, you can learn more about it in OneToMany Mapping Documentation, and here's what you need to map Person and PersonSubjectPlace entities:
In your Person class:
#OneToMany(mappedBy="person")
private List<PersonSubjectPlace> personsubjectPlaces;
In your PersonSubjectPlace class:
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name="PRSID") //Specify the primary key of Person
private Person person;
For further information about the difference between JoinColumn and mappedBy you can take a look at this answer.
EDIT:
For the mapping between SubjectPlace and PersonSubjectPlace:
In your SubjectPlace class:
#OneToMany(mappedBy="subjectPlace")
private List<PersonSubjectPlace> personsubjectPlaces;
In your PersonSubjectPlace class:
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name="SPID") //Specify the primary key of SubjectPerson
private SubjectPlace subjectPlace;
Note:
The best approach to map those classes is to use #JoinTable between Person and SubjectPlace, take a look at this #JoinTable example, because PersonSubjectPlace is pratically an asociation-entity between Person and SubjectPlace.
You should remove #Joincolumn annotation and add mappedBy variable to #OneToMany annotation.
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "spid")
You should have a variable in SubjectPlace that has a Person where you should put #JoinColumn annotation
Firstly, I am somewhat new with Hibernate. To get to know the technology I am using it in a project. I am trying to map the following database:
Campaign
campaignId(+)
name
Promotion
campaignId(+)
discount(+)
product
message
I've indicated the primary key in both cases with a (+). The 'campaignId' in Promotion is a foreign key to Campaign to model the 1:m mapping (A Campaign has many Promotions). Using annotations I am stuck on how to do this.
I do not really want to add a promotionId in the Promotion table as it makes working with the data cumbersome. This of course, makes the bridging table a bit tricky. I also have problems working with a foreign key that is also part of the primary key.
Is a mapping for this possible at all?
Ok, I got it working. Sort of. Have to check if persistence actually work. I did the following:
#Entity
#Table(name = "CAMPAIGNS")
#Audited
public class CampaignEntity {
private int campaignId;
private String name;
private List<PromotionEntity> promotions;
public CampaignEntity(int campaignId, String name) {
this.campaignId = campaignId;
this.name = name;
}
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY)
#Column(name = "cmp_id")
public int getCampaignId() {
return campaignId;
}
public void setCampaignId(int campaignId) {
this.campaignId = campaignId;
}
// Campaign name here... left out to save space
#OneToMany
#JoinColumn(name = "cmp_id")
public List<PromotionEntity> getPromotions() {
return promotions;
}
public void setPromotions(List<PromotionEntity> promotions) {
this.promotions = promotions;
}
}
Promotion is a vanilla mapping (not using embedded after all), with the fields: campaignId, discount, message. (It also does not have a #ManyToOne annotation.)
Does that make sense?
Lastly, and this will be first prize: as you can see I'm using Envers to audit the whole thing. The above creates a rather ugly "CampaignEntity_PromotionEntity_AUD" table. I understand that it is needed, but how can I rename it to CAMPAIGN_PROMOTION_AUD rather?
Thanks guys!
I got an answer on a lonely website deeply hidden away in far-corners of the Hibernate's Jira error tracking website: https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/HHH-3729.
The answer is to use #AuditJoinTable(name = "CAMPAIGN_PROMOTION_AUD") of course.
This is a basic example of a one-to-many relationship and its inverse.
public class Campaign
{
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "campaign)
private List<Promotion> promotions;
}
public class Promotion
{
#ManyToOne
private Campaign campaign;
}
You can use an EmbeddedId to create a multi-field PK.
Remove the PK fields from Promotion
Create a separate entity, say PromotionPK, without any annotations except for #Column on the PK fields
In Promotion, include that PK class as field, annotating it using #EmbeddedId, with getters and setters
The FK mapping is as Wouter indicated.
This is what I am now using. It works well and Hibernate handles the PKs of the Promotions for me. Thanks again.
#Entity
#Table(name = "CAMPAIGNS")
#Audited
public class CampaignEntity {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY)
#Column(name = "id", nullable = false)
private Integer campaignId;
#Column(name = "name", nullable = false, unique = true)
private String campaignName;
#OneToMany(cascade = CascadeType.ALL, orphanRemoval = true)
#JoinTable(name = "CAMPAIGN_PROMOTIONS",
joinColumns = { #JoinColumn(name = "campaign_id") },
inverseJoinColumns = { #JoinColumn(name = "promotion_id") })
private Set<PromotionEntity> promotions;
...
}
and then, PromotionEntity:
#Entity
#Table(name = "PROMOTIONS")
#Audited
public class PromotionEntity implements Comparable<PromotionEntity> {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY)
private Integer id;
#Column(name = "discount", nullable = false)
private Integer discount;
#Column(name = "message", nullable = false)
private String message;
...
}
I also prefer annotating the fields rather than the getters as it is more compact and reads easier.