We Keep Coding

Cannot delete child in one-to-many relationship

When I put inverse=true into set, nothing gets deleted. When I don't, and I remove MealIngredient from set, then Hibernate tries to set null, it fails and exception is thrown:
[SQLITE_CONSTRAINT] Abort due to constraint violation (MealIngredients.mealId may not be NULL)
Here are XML mappings:
<class name="restaurant.meal.Meal" table="Meals">
<id name="id" type="integer">
<column name="id" not-null="true" unique="true"/>
<generator class="increment"/>
</id>
<!-- some other, simple properties -->
<set name="ingredientsSet" cascade="all" lazy="false">
<key>
<column name="mealId" not-null="true" />
</key>
<one-to-many class="restaurant.meal.MealIngredient" />
</set>
</class>
<class name="restaurant.meal.MealIngredient" table="MealIngredients">
<composite-id name="id" class="restaurant.meal.MealIngredient$Id">
<key-property name="ingredientId" />
<key-property name="mealId" />
</composite-id>
<many-to-one name="ingredient" class="restaurant.storage.Ingredient" insert="false" update="false" lazy="false">
<column name="ingredientId" not-null="true" />
</many-to-one>
<many-to-one name="meal" class="restaurant.meal.Meal" insert="false" update="false" lazy="false">
<column name="mealId" not-null="true" />
</many-to-one>
<!-- other properties -->
</class>
Yes, the relationship between Meal and Ingredient is many-to-many with join table MealIngredient (and yes, I have to map MealIngredient as well, because of additional columns in that table).
This question did not help me, neither did this.
Edit:
Only inserting works with current mapping, update just generates another row in MealIngredient table.
Edit 2: hashCode and equals implementations:
MealIngredient$Id: (uses Apache commons-lang EqualsBuilder and HashCodeBuilder)
#Override
public boolean equals(Object o) {
if(!(o instanceof Id))
return false;
Id other = (Id) o;
return new EqualsBuilder()
.append(this.getMealId(), other.getMealId())
.append(this.getIngredientId(), other.getIngredientId())
.isEquals();
}
#Override
public int hashCode() {
return new HashCodeBuilder()
.append(this.getMealId())
.append(this.getIngredientId())
.hashCode();
}
MealIngredient:
#Override
public boolean equals(Object o)
{
if(!(o instanceof MealIngredient))
return false;
MealIngredient other = (MealIngredient) o;
return this.getId().equals(other.getId());
}
#Override
public int hashCode()
{
return this.getId().hashCode();
}
I checked log and although I don't know what Hibernate does under the hood, but it does make the insert into MealIngredient:
15:42:53,122 TRACE IntegerType:172 - returning '5' as column: quantity3_
Hibernate:
insert
into
MealIngredients
(quantity, ingredientId, mealId)
values
(?, ?, ?)
15:42:53,131 TRACE IntegerType:133 - binding '16' to parameter: 1
15:42:53,131 TRACE IntegerType:133 - binding '5' to parameter: 2
15:42:53,131 TRACE IntegerType:133 - binding '1' to parameter: 3
And when I remove MealIngredient from Meal.ingredientsSet, Hibernate makes update and tries to set mealId to null:
Hibernate:
update
MealIngredients
set
quantity=?
where
ingredientId=?
and mealId=?
15:48:57,529 TRACE IntegerType:126 - binding null to parameter: 1
15:48:57,529 TRACE IntegerType:133 - binding '1' to parameter: 2
15:48:57,531 TRACE IntegerType:133 - binding '1' to parameter: 3
15:48:57,535 WARN JDBCExceptionReporter:77 - SQL Error: 0, SQLState: null
15:48:57,535 ERROR JDBCExceptionReporter:78 - [SQLITE_CONSTRAINT] Abort due to constraint violation (MealIngredients.quantity may not be NULL)

I believe the explanation you're looking for is here. Well, sort of. Don't read his explanation, it confuses me. His examples are excellent though.
So, anyways, I think you want to do one of the following:
inverse=false and remove the mealIngredient from your ingredients
collection and then save the Meal
inverse=true and have to null the meal instance variable in MealIngredient and save the MealIngredient
EDIT: The issue with inserts instead of updates is probably due to the fact that you have not over-ridden hashcode and equals. If you're using Eclipse, I believe it can do it for you, but you must tell it to use both properties of your composite key when it auto generates the methods. Per Hibernate documentation chapter 5:
The persistent class must override equals() and hashCode() to
implement composite identifier equality. It must also implement
Serializable.

Unfortunately, it seems that Hibernate does not work well with composite primary keys. I had to add extra ID column into many-to-many join tables (like my MealIngredient) and work with that.
After I use extra ID as primary key, inserting/updating/deleting works as expected (even with cascade set to delete-orphan, cascade deleting works!).
I provide final mappings for entities Meal and MealIngredient, for future reference. I hope this will help others, when they stumble upon many-to-many relationships with additional properties/columns in join table.
<class name="restaurant.meal.Meal" table="Meals">
<id name="id" type="integer">
<column name="id" not-null="true" unique="true"/>
<generator class="increment"/>
</id>
<!-- additional properties -->
<set name="ingredientsSet" table="MealIngredients" cascade="all-delete-orphan" lazy="false" inverse="true">
<key update="true">
<column name="mealId" not-null="true" />
</key>
<one-to-many class="restaurant.meal.MealIngredient" />
</set>
</class>
<class name="restaurant.meal.MealIngredient" table="MealIngredients">
<id name="id" type="integer">
<column name="id" not-null="true" unique="true"/>
<generator class="increment"/>
</id>
<many-to-one name="ingredient" column="ingredientId" not-null="true" class="restaurant.storage.Ingredient" lazy="false" />
<many-to-one name="meal" column="mealId" not-null="true" class="restaurant.meal.Meal" lazy="false" />
<!-- additional properties -->
</class>

Hibernate Mapping of Join Table with Meta Data

I'm trying to figure out how to map the relationship between two tables through a join table that has some meta data in it. In short, the three tables represent the page of a form, and each page can contain any number of elements (questions.) For some reason, the original developer decided that elements could be used on multiple forms. This means that the weight column, used to order the elements on the page, is in the join table.
How the heck do I map this in XML? (Annotations aren't an option.)
For the join table, I guess it's like this:
<class name="com.foo.bar.model.db.ApplicationPageElements"
table="APPLICATION_PAGE_ELEMENTS">
<composite-id name="id" class="com.foo.bar.model.db.ApplicationPageElementsKey">
<key-property name="pageId" column="page_id"/>
<key-property name="elementId" column="element_id"/>
</composite-id>
<property name="weight" type="java.lang.Long">
<column name="WEIGHT" precision="0" />
</property>
</class>
My instincts have me wanting to do something like this from the ApplicationPage side of things:
<set name="applicationElements" table="applicationPageElement">
<key column="page_id"/>
<many-to-many column="element_id" unique="true"
class="com.foo.bar.model.db.ApplicationElements" />
</set>
And that's where I get all slack-jawed, stare at the screen, and sob.
We're using .hbm.xml files to map our database. We also made the decision to not change our database.
Any ideas on how to map this in XML?

Instead of thinking of the relationship between application_page and application_element as many to many, think of it as a one to many relationship from application_page to ApplicationPageElements and a one to many relationship from application_element to ApplicationPageElements.
In your application_page xml mapping add this:
<set name="applicationElements" inverse="true">
<key column="page_id"/>
<one-to-many class="ApplicationPageElements"/>
</set>
page_id forms a part of the primary key of the join table. So, mark the collection as inverse.
Your mapping for the join table is correct. But, with the above change current mapping of your join table you can navigate from application_page to ApplicationPageElements. To navigate from application_page to application_element (via ApplicationPageElements) add a many to one relationship in join table mapping.
<class name="com.foo.bar.model.db.ApplicationPageElements"
table="APPLICATION_PAGE_ELEMENTS">
<composite-id name="id" class="com.foo.bar.model.db.ApplicationPageElementsKey">
<key-property name="pageId" column="page_id"/>
<key-property name="elementId" column="element_id"/>
</composite-id>
<property name="weight" type="java.lang.Long">
<column name="WEIGHT" precision="0" />
</property>
<many-to-one name="elements" class="ApplicationElements"
column="element_id" not-null="true" insert="false" update="false"/>
<many-to-one name="page" class="ApplicationPage"
column="page_id" not-null="true" insert="false" update="false"/>
</class>
Note that in the above many-to-one mapping, insert and update attributes are set to false. This is necessary because the columns are mapped twice, once in the composite key (which is responsible for insertion of the values) and again for the many-to-one associations.
The above use case is mentioned in detail in the book: Java Persistence with Hibernate.

Hibernate: Inconsistent primary key generation due to one-to-one relation

I have two one-to-one relations here between a class called "MailAccount" and the classes "IncomingServer" and "OutgoingServer".
(It's a Java application running on Tomcat and Ubuntu server edition).
The mapping looks like this:
MailAccount.hbm.xml
<hibernate-mapping package="com.mail.account">
<class name="MailAccount" table="MAILACCOUNTS" dynamic-update="true">
<id name="id" column="MAIL_ACCOUNT_ID">
<generator class="native" />
</id>
<one-to-one name="incomingServer" cascade="all-delete-orphan">
</one-to-one>
<one-to-one name="outgoingServer" cascade="all-delete-orphan">
</one-to-one>
</class>
</hibernate-mapping>
IncomingMailServer.hbm.xml
<hibernate-mapping>
<class name="com.IncomingMailServer" table="MAILSERVER_INCOMING" abstract="true">
<id name="id" type="long" access="field">
<column name="MAIL_SERVER_ID" />
<generator class="native" />
</id>
<discriminator column="SERVER_TYPE" type="string"/>
<many-to-one name="mailAccount" column="MAIL_ACCOUNT_ID" not-null="true" unique="true" />
<subclass name="com.ImapServer" extends="com.IncomingMailServer" discriminator-value="IMAP_SERVER" />
<subclass name="com.Pop3Server" extends="com.IncomingMailServer" discriminator-value="POP3_SERVER" />
</class>
</hibernate-mapping>
OutgoingMailServer.hbm.xml
<hibernate-mapping>
<class name="com.OutgoingMailServer" table="MAILSERVER_OUTGOING" abstract="true">
<id name="id" type="long" access="field">
<column name="MAIL_SERVER_ID" />
<generator class="native" />
</id>
<discriminator column="SERVER_TYPE" type="string"/>
<many-to-one name="mailAccount" column="MAIL_ACCOUNT_ID" not-null="true" unique="true" />
<subclass name="com.SmtpServer" extends="com.OutgoingMailServer" discriminator-value="SMTP_SERVER" />
</class>
</hibernate-mapping>
The class hierarchy looks like this:
public class MailAccount{
IncomingMailServer incomingServer;
OutgoingMailServer outgoingServer;
}
public class MailServer{
HostAddress hostAddress;
Port port;
}
public class IncomingMailServer extends MailServer{
// ...
}
public class OutgoingMailServer extends MailServer{
// ...
}
public class ImapServer extends IncomingMailServer{
// ...
}
public class Pop3Server extends IncomingMailServer{
// ...
}
public class SmtpServer extends OutgoingMailServer{
// ...
}
Now, here comes the problem:
Although most of the time my application runs well, there seems to be one situation in which email servers get deleted, but the corresponding account doesn't and that's when this call is made:
session.delete(mailAccountInstance);
In a one-to-one relation in Hibernate, the primary keys between mail account and its servers must be equal, if not, the relation completely gets out of sync:
Example:
Imagine, the tables are filled with data like this:
Table "MailAccount" (Current auto_increment value: 2)
MAIL_ACCOUNT_ID NAME
0 Account1
1 Account2
Table "IncomingMailServer" (Current auto_increment value: 2)
MAIL_SERVER_ID MAIL_ACCOUNT_ID
0 0
1 1
Now, image the account with ID=1 gets deleted and new accounts get added. The following then SOMETIMES happens:
Table "MailAccount" (Current auto_increment value: 3)
MAIL_ACCOUNT_ID NAME
0 Account1
1 Account2
2 Account3
Table "IncomingMailServer" (Current auto_increment value: 2)
MAIL_SERVER_ID MAIL_ACCOUNT_ID
0 0
1 2
This completely messes up my database consistency.
How can I avoid this?

If you want a shared primary key, you can use the native id generator only once. You create the mail account first, which will generate its own id, but when you create the Incoming- or OutgoingMailServer, these need to take their id from the mailAccount property.
So you need the "foreign" generator:
<class name="OutgoingMailServer">
<id name="id" column="MAIL_SERVER_ID">
<generator class="foreign">
<param name="property">mailAccount</param>
</generator>
</id>
<one-to-one name="mailAccount" not-null="true" constrained="true"/>
<class>
You don't need a MAIL_ACCOUNT_ID column, since it will always be identical to the MAIL_SERVER_ID anyway.
Quite basic follow the reference about bidirectional one-to-one association on a primary key.

Hibernate is updating instead of inserting, why?

I'm starting my adventure with Hibernate, so please be patient :)
I want to make mapping for two tables, for example A and B. The relation beetwen A and B is one-to-many.
I wrote this hbm.xml file:
<hibernate-mapping package="something">
<class name="A" table="A">
<id name="id" type="int" column="ID">
<generator class="native" />
</id>
<set name="setInA" sort="natural" cascade="all" lazy="false">
<key column="ANOTHER_ID"/>
<one-to-many class="B" />
</set>
</class>
<class name="B" table="B">
<id name="anotherId" type="int" column="ANOTHER_ID">
<generator class="native" />
</id>
</class>
</hibernate-mapping>
Of course I made also POJO classes A and B.
And now, when I try to do:
A a = new A();
Set<B> set = new TreeSet<B>();
set.add(new B());
a.setSetInA(set);
session.save(a);
Hibernate inserts new row to table A, but (what is the worst) is not inserting new row to B table, but only makes SQL Update on not existing row in B.
Can tell me anyone why it is happening? What I made wrong?

You should either persist B's objects firstly, or use Cascade option.

You can use Cascade without using annotations:
<set name="setInA" sort="natural" cascade="all" lazy="false" cascade="all">
<key column="ANOTHER_ID"/>
<one-to-many class="B" />
</set>
This will ensure that collection of B instances is inserted when you insert A.

Found this question while searching for causes of the same symptoms in my system. cascade="all" did not help.
In my case I solved this by adding a mapping to the list element, in this example class B.
Please note that the enclosing class (A in this example) also was versioned. Hibernate might require that versioning (used for optimistic locking) must be enabled for all nested elements. I haven't found any documentation to support this theory.

How to Stop Hibernate From Trying to Update one-to-many Over Join Table

Ok so I'm having bit of a problem with my Hibernate mappings and getting the desired behavior.
Basically what I have is the following Hibernate mapping:
<hibernate-mapping>
<class name="com.package.Person" table="PERSON" schema="MYSCHEMA" lazy="false">
<id name="personId" column="PERSON_ID" type="java.lang.Long">
<generator class="sequence">
<param name="sequence">PERSON_ID_SEQ</param>
</generator>
</id>
<property name="firstName" type="string" column="FIRST_NAME">
<property name="lastName" type="string" column="LAST_NAME">
<property name="age" type="int" column="AGE">
<set name="skills" table="PERSON_SKILL" cascade="all-delete-orphan">
<key>
<column name="PERSON_ID" precision="12" scale="0" not-null="true"/>
</key>
<many-to-many column="SKILL_ID" unique="true" class="com.package.Skill"/>
</set>
</class>
</hibernate-mapping>
<hibernate-mapping>
<class name="com.package.Skill" table="SKILL" schema="MYSCHEMA">
<id name="skillId" column="SKILL_ID" type="java.lang.Long">
<generator class="sequence">
<param name="sequence">SKILL_ID_SEQ</param>
</generator>
</id>
<property name="description" type="string" column="DESCRIPTION">
</class>
</hibernate-mapping>
So lets assume that I have already populated the Skill table with some skills in it. Now when I create a new Person I want to associate them with a set of skills that already exist in the skill table by just setting the ID of the skill. For example:
Person p = new Person();
p.setFirstName("John");
p.setLastName("Doe");
p.setAge(55);
//Skill with id=2 is already in the skill table
Skill s = new Skill()
s.setSkillId(2L);
p.setSkills(new HashSet<Skill>(Arrays.asList(s)));
PersonDao.saveOrUpdate(p);
If I try to do that however I get an error saying:
WARN (org.slf4j.impl.JCLLoggerAdapter:357) - SQL Error: 1407, SQLState: 72000
ERROR (org.slf4j.impl.JCLLoggerAdapter:454) - ORA-01407: cannot update ("MYSCHEMA"."SKILL"."DESCRIPTION") to NULL
ERROR (org.slf4j.impl.JCLLoggerAdapter:532) - Could not synchronize database state with session
org.hibernate.exception.GenericJDBCException: Could not execute JDBC batch update
The reason I am getting this error I think is because Hibernate sees that the Skill with Id 2 has 'updated' its description to null (since I never set it) and tries to update it. But I don't want Hibernate to update this. What I want it to do is insert the new Person p and insert a record into the join table, PERSON_SKILL, that matches p with the skill in the SKILL table with id=2 without touching the SKILL table.
Is there anyway to achieve this behavior?

Instead of creating the Skill object yourself:
//Skill with id=2 is already in the skill table
Skill s = new Skill()
s.setSkillId(2L);
p.setSkills(new HashSet<Skill>(Arrays.asList(s)));
You should be retrieving it from the Hibernate Session:
Skill s = (Skill) session.get(Skill.class, 2L);
p.setSkills(new HashSet<Skill>(Arrays.asList(s)));
This way the Session thinks that the skill contained in p.skills is persistent, and not transient.

This may be possible if you don't cascade all-delete-orphan which is explicitely telling hibernate to cascade the changes.
But the right way would be IMO to load load the desired Skill entity from the database and to add it to the set of skills of the Person.