I have the following entities:
#Entity
public class Policy {
#ID
private String uuid;
private String policyId;
private Long version;
private Long auditVersion;
}
#Entity
public class PolicySearch {
#ID
private String uuid;
#ManyToOne(optional = false)
#JoinColumn(name = "policy_id", referencedColumnName = "policy_id")
private Policy policy;
}
Basically, I've got an insurance policy where all changes are tracked in the DB (auditVersion). After some smaller changes a version can be released, that's when version increments and auditVersion starts at 0 again. Each DB entry has a different UUID, but the insuranceId stays the same for all versions of one policy.
The problem: I've got an entity for searches, a search always searches all versions of a policy - that's why I reference the policyId and not the uuid. When JPA loads the entity I end up with any policy. I would like a way to always get the highest version of a policy given the referenced policyId (and the highest auditVersion of that version).
I've thought of the following ways, but I'm not happy with either of those:
Change the type of the referenced Policy from Policy to String and only save the policyId, this would work but I would still want the foreign key constraint and I can't seem to find a way to create it with a JPA annotation (JPA creates my DB schema).
Keep the entities as is but discard the loaded Policy in favor of the newest one after loading the PolicySearch. This could be done in the DAO but if any entities in the future have PolicySearch as a member this seems like a really bad idea.
Any help would be greatly appreciated. I use EclipseLink.
I tried to add constraints to the DB but Postgres won't let you add foreign key constraints for columns which are not unique. The solution (which a coworker of mine came up with) for us was to change the database design and create a new entity which holds the PolicyId. So our Entities now look like this:
#Entity
public class Policy {
#ID
private String policyId;
}
#Entity
public class PolicyVersion {
#ID
private String uuid;
private Policy policy;
private Long version;
private Long auditVersion;
}
#Entity
public class PolicySearch {
#ID
private String uuid;
#ManyToOne(optional = false)
#JoinColumn(name = "policy_id", referencedColumnName = "policy_id")
private Policy policy;
}
This basically solves all the problems and has some other benefits too (like easy queries).
Related
I'm starting a project to know more in detail JPA.
Context:
At the end of his internship, the student has a report to make and a presentation in front of his professor to do about the internship.
I've a database, which is called "grade_management". It must contains a "student", "presentation", "report", "professor" and a "mark" (there are several rating criteria such as expression, quality of powerpoint ...) table. But now it's empty, since I want to make it throught JPA.
I've a "Presentation" class. Which countain this:
#Entity
public class Presentation implements Serializable {
#Id
#GeneratedValue (strategy=GenerationType.AUTO)
private int presentation_id;
private Date date;
private mark_id;
private int professor_id;
public Soutenance() {}
public Soutenance(Date date) {
this.date = date;
}
}
But the Presentation table contain 2 foreign key: professor_id and mark_id.
My question is: How can I indicate that both of them are foreign key ?
I'm sorry if I'm not clear, don't hesitation to ask question.
Cordially
You shouldn't reference other entities by their ID, but by a direct reference to the entity.
Something like that :
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "mark_id", referencedColumnName = "id")
private Mark mark; // supposed here that mark_id if link to entity `Mark`
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "professor_id", referencedColumnName = "id") // suppose "id" is the column name of the PK inside the table Professor.
private Professor professor; // supposed here that professor_id if link to entity `Professor`
This code is supposing that you use an unidirectional relation.
For bidirectional you have to define this in the other side (Mark/Professor type)
#OneToMany(mappedBy = "professor")
private Presentation presentation;
From your explanation, it looks like you have a Database named grade_management and in that database you have "student", "presentation", "report", "professor" and a "mark" tables (i.e: which are #Entity by themselves defined in their separate respective classes )
I'm not sure whether you have defined them or not. If not then you have to define them first and then use the refactored code mentioned below.
So, you will have many-to-one relation mapping. You can annotate your foreign keys belonging to different tables using #ManyToOne annotation to indicate relation type and #JoinColumn annotation to indicate that this entity has a foreign key to the referenced table.
You can redefine your Presentation class show below:
#Entity
#Table(name = "Presentation")
public class Presentation implements Serializable {
#Id
#Column(name="presentation_id")
#GeneratedValue (strategy=GenerationType.AUTO)
private int presentation_id;
private Date date;
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "mark_id")
private Mark mark_id;
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "professor_id")
private Professor professor_id;
public Soutenance() {}
public Soutenance(Date date) {
this.date = date;
}
//getter and setter
}
Also, if you need more information to read upon for yourself you can always checkout this Hibernate Documentation that explains everything you'll need to know.
I think it may be possible dupplicate of this: Schema-validation: missing table [hibernate_sequences] but I can't figure it out.
So in my application.properties file I have this option: spring.jpa.hibernate.ddl-auto=validate and I receive this error:
Schema-validation: missing table [game]
Why I am receiving this?
Here is my Game class and User class:
Game:
#Entity
public class Game {
#Id
#Column(name = "GAME_NUMBER")
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.SEQUENCE)
private long gameNumber;
private int playerScore;
private int NPCScore;
private Date datetime;
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name="USER_ID")
private User user;
public Game() {}
public Game(int playerScore, int nPCScore, Date datetime) {
super();
this.playerScore = playerScore;
this.NPCScore = nPCScore;
this.datetime = datetime;
}
public User getUser() {
return user;
}
} + getters & setters
User:
#Entity
public class User {
#Id
#Column(name = "USER_ID")
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.SEQUENCE)
private long userId;
private String username;
private String password;
#OneToMany(mappedBy="user",cascade=CascadeType.ALL)
private List<Game> games;
#ElementCollection
private List<Date> startSessions;
public User() {}
public User(String username, String password, List<Game> games, List<Date> startSessions) {
super();
this.username = username;
this.password = password;
this.games = games;
this.startSessions = startSessions;
}
}
validate validates that the entities are compatible against the target, to a degree it's not foolproof. Anyway, whatever database you are trying to validate against does not have a table called game in which to store the entities.
This answer goes into more detail about what validate does.
Hibernate - hibernate.hbm2ddl.auto = validate
specifically,
checks the presence of tables, columns, id generators
Without knowing your database/expectations (are you expecting it to be created, or using Flyway/Liquibase to create/update the database etc.) I can't answer if validate is correct for your use case.
You could try create-drop to create and drop the table on startup/shutdown, but this isn't a solution for any production control over a database.
I got the same as I changed to Hibernate 5.4.0.Final.
Either Hibernate suddenly has problems to recognize the default schema or the driver does not return the schema properly.
I was able to bypass it by either adding the schema definition to the table definition.
#Table(name = "GAME", schema = "PUBLIC")
or by adding a default schema in persistence.xml.
<property name="hibernate.default_schema" value="PUBLIC" />
Don't forget permissions:
GRANT select, insert, update, delete, alter ON table_name TO usr_name;
This error can appear while using spring boot with flywayDB.
The issue might be due to the wrong naming convention of script files, which were used by flywayDB.
https://flywaydb.org/documentation/migrations#naming
The SQL standard requires names stored in uppercase.
If you named the table/fields in lowercase - JPA can automatically convert case to upper and trying to search names in this case, but write to logs in lower ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Add this in application.yml:
spring:
jpa:
properties:
hibernate:
default_schema: game
Hibernate version 5.6.9,
Case-sensitive implementation:
hibernate:
physical_naming_strategy: 'org.hibernate.boot.model.naming.PhysicalNamingStrategyStandardImpl'
I'm seeing some weird behavior with my web service. I am using jersey for JAXRS and eclipselink for JPA. I suspect the issue is somewhere with JPA. To keep it short, I have 2 entities: History and Challenge.
#XmlRootElement
#Entity
public class History {
#Column
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO)
public long id;
#JoinColumn
#ManyToOne
public Challenge challenge;
public History() {
}
}
#XmlRootElement
#Entity
public class Challenge {
#Column
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO)
public long id;
#Column(length = 255)
public String title;
#Column(length = 1000)
public String description;
public Challenge() {
}
}
All entries for History and Challenge are present in the database and don't change. Usually, when I query all histories, I get back all the entries, and each History has a Challenge attached. However, sometimes, one or 2 of the history entries have null for the Challenge member (although the db is in perfect order). And if I reload the app inside Tomcat, the query works OK again. Later in time, this bug appears again. So I'm guessing it has something to do with how I use the EntityManager. Here is the code for querying all histories:
public List<History> getHistories() {
EntityManager em = emFactory.createEntityManager();
Query query = em.createQuery("SELECT h FROM History h");
List<History> list = (List<History>) query.getResultList();
em.close();
return list;
}
As I said earlier, the histories and challenges don't change. However, I have some other entities that refer to History and maybe I am doing something somewhere else that triggers this problem here. Should I call em.clear() or em.flush() in my method? Is it necessary in my case where I create an entity manager for each request?
EclipseLink enables a shared cache by default.
See,
http://wiki.eclipse.org/EclipseLink/FAQ/How_to_disable_the_shared_cache%3F
It seems you have corrupted you objects somehow. Perhaps you did not set the ManyToOne when you created the objects. Or somehow set it to null in your app?
I am writing small app, using Play Framework 2.0 which uses Ebean as ORM.
So I need many-to-many relationship between User class and UserGroup class.
Here is some code:
#Entity
public class User extends Domain {
#Id
public Long id;
public String name;
#ManyToMany(fetch = FetchType.EAGER, cascade = CascadeType.ALL)
public Set<UserGroup> groups = new HashSet();
}
#Entity
public class UserGroup extends Domain {
#Id
public Long id;
public String name;
#ManyToMany(mappedBy="groups")
public Set<User> users = new HashSet();
}
Database scheme generator generates good scheme for that code with intermediate table and all work quite ok, till I using many-to-many.
So I am adding group in one request:
user.groups.add(UserGroup.find.byId(groupId));
user.update();
And trying output them to System.out in another:
System.out.println(user.groups);
And this returns:
BeanSet deferred
Quick search show that BeanSet is lazy-loading container from Ebean. But seems like it doesn't work in proper way or I missed something important.
So is there any ideas about what I am doing wrong?
You need to save associations manually
user.groups.add(UserGroup.find.byId(groupId));
user.saveManyToManyAssociations("groups");
user.update();
In many sources I have read PrimaryKey Classes and even JPA2 entities should be serializable.
IN my example (legacy database) there is a relationship between employee and languages:
Employee Class:
#Entity
#IdClass(EmpleadoId.class)
#Table(name = "NO_INFGRAEMPL")
public class Empleado {
#Id
#Column(name = "IGECOMPANIA", unique = true)
private String compania;
#Id
#Column(name = "IGENUMEROIDENTIFIC", unique = true)
private String numeroIdentificacion;
//...
}
Employee Compound PrimaryKey Class:
public class EmpleadoId {
private String compania;
private String numeroIdentificacion;
//...
}
Employee Language SKill Class:
#Entity
#IdClass(IdiomaEmpleadoId.class)
#Table(name = "NO_IDIOMEMPLE")
public class IdiomaEmpleado {
#Id
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinColumns(value = {
#JoinColumn(name= "IEMCOMPANIA", referencedColumnName = "IGECOMPANIA"),
#JoinColumn(name = "IEMEMPLEADO", referencedColumnName = "IGENUMEROIDENTIFIC")
})
private Empleado empleado;
#Id
#ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinColumn(name = "IEMIDIOMA")
private Idioma idioma;
#Column(name = "IEMNIVELLECTURA")
private String nivelLectura;
//...
}
Employee Language Skill Compound PrimaryKey Class:
public class IdiomaEmpleadoId {
private EmpleadoId empleado;
private String idioma;
//...
}
Language Class:
#Entity
#Table(name = "NO_IDIOMAS")
public class Idioma {
#Id
#Column(name = "IDICODIGO")
private String codigo;
#Column(name = "IDIDESCRIPCION")
private String descripcion;
//...
}
I am using EclipseLink JPA2 Provider under a J2SE application and it is not giving me any exceptions.
My questions are:
Why is it not giving me exceptions? Is it not enforced to have Serializable?
Is it safe to continue this way or should I definitely implemente serializable?.
In which ones?, JPA2 Entities or PrimaryKey Classes?
Thanks a lot for the help.
JPA specification contains such a requirement (JSR-317 secion 2.4 Primary Keys and Entity Identity):
The primary key class must be serializable.
If EclipseLink really doesn't enforce this requirement, it's an implementation detail of EclipseLink and I wouldn't recommend you to rely on it.
However, there are no requirements on serializability of entities, except for the following one which looks more like a recommendation than a requirement:
If an entity instance is to be passed by value as a detached object (e.g., through a remote interface), the
entity class must implement the Serializable interface.
Nothing is required to be serializable, but it seems it is requried by the spec (10x to axtavt) for primary keys, although there is no direct need for it.
Serialization is needed if the objects are transferred over-the-wire or persisted to disk, so I can't see the reason behind that decision. However, you should conform to it.
Primary key classes have to implement serializable and composite-ID class must implement serializable are two different questions.
I am going to answer you both, and hope it will help you to distinguish and understand holistically.
Primary key classes have to implement serializable:
Note: It could work without its iplementation also.
JPA specification contains such a requirement (JSR-317 secion 2.4 Primary Keys and Entity Identity):
The primary key class must be serializable.
However, there are no requirements on serializability of entities, so it's a recommendation than a requirement
exception:
If an entity instance is to be passed by value as a detached object (e.g., through a remote interface), the entity class must implement the Serializable interface.
Composite-ID class must implement serializable.
The id is used as a key to index loaded objects in the session.
The session object needs to be serializable, hence all objects referenced by it must be serializable as well.
In case of CompositeIds the class itself is used as the id.