I am trying to create two entities where both entities have embeddedIds. One of the entities have 2 references to the other entity, where both of those references are related as ManyToOne.
Example codes are written below;
#Embeddable
public class ItemPK {
#Column(nullable = false, length = 100)
private String itemId;
#Column(name = "item_client_id", nullable = false)
private int clientId;
...
}
#Entity
#Table(name = "item")
public class Item {
#EmbeddedId
private ItemPK id;
#ManyToOne
#JoinColumn(name = "item_client_id")
private Client client;
#OneToMany(mappedBy="item", cascade = CascadeType.ALL, orphanRemoval = true)
private Set<RelatedItem> relatedItems;
#OneToMany(mappedBy="relatedItem", cascade = CascadeType.ALL, orphanRemoval = true)
private Set<RelatedItem> relatedItemsRHS;
...
}
#Embeddable
public class RelatedItemPK {
#Column(name = "itemId", length = 100, nullable = false)
private String itemId;
#Column(name = "item_client_id", nullable = false)
private int clientId;
#Column(name = "relatedItemId", length = 100, nullable = false)
private String relatedItemId;
#Column(name = "related_item_client_id", nullable = false)
private int relatedItemClientId;
...
}
#Entity
#Table(name = "related_item")
public class RelatedItem {
#EmbeddedId
private RelatedItemPK id;
#ManyToOne(cascade = CascadeType.ALL, optional = false)
#JoinColumns({
#JoinColumn(name="itemId", referencedColumnName="itemId", insertable=false, updatable=false),
#JoinColumn(name="item_client_id", referencedColumnName="item_client_id", insertable=false, updatable=false)
})
private Item item;
#ManyToOne(cascade = CascadeType.ALL, optional = false)
#JoinColumns({
#JoinColumn(name="related_item_client_id", referencedColumnName="item_client_id", insertable=false, updatable=false),
#JoinColumn(name="relatedItemId", referencedColumnName="itemId", insertable=false, updatable=false)
})
private Item relatedItem;
...
}
The problem is while creating foreign keys for RelatedItem entity, I got an SQLException. It is the second ManyToOne relation that fails. The foreign key generation sql is below,
ALTER TABLE related_item ADD CONSTRAINT FK_related_item_related_item_client_id FOREIGN KEY (related_item_client_id, relatedItemId) REFERENCES item (item_client_id, itemId)
Since item table is indexed first by itemId then by item_client_id, this statement causes MySQL to produce an error.
I would like to switch the places of columns so that the SQL should look like the following,
ALTER TABLE related_item ADD CONSTRAINT FK_related_item_relatedItemId FOREIGN KEY (relatedItemId, related_item_client_id) REFERENCES item (itemId,item_client_id)
I tried changing the order of "JoinColumn"s but the result didn't change. I also tried renaming the fields to check if persistence provider choses the order by column name but again the result didn't change.
So, is there a way to enforce the column ordering?
p.s. I use following stuff:
MySQL 5.1
EclipseLink 2.0.0
Java EE 6
JPA 2
GlassFish v3
Edit: EclipseLink produces following SQL, which fails to run;
CREATE TABLE related_item (SIMILARITY DOUBLE, widget_id INTEGER NOT NULL, relatedItemId VARCHAR(100) NOT NULL, itemId VARCHAR(100) NOT NULL, related_item_client_id INTEGER NOT NULL, item_client_id INTEGER NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (widget_id, relatedItemId, itemId, related_item_client_id, item_client_id));
CREATE TABLE item (IMAGEURL VARCHAR(2048), STATUS VARCHAR(64), URL VARCHAR(2048), PRICE DOUBLE, STOCK INTEGER, DESCRIPTION TEXT(64000), NAME VARCHAR(255), ITEMID VARCHAR(100) NOT NULL, item_client_id INTEGER NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (ITEMID, item_client_id));
ALTER TABLE related_item ADD CONSTRAINT FK_related_item_itemId FOREIGN KEY (itemId, item_client_id) REFERENCES item (itemId, item_client_id);
ALTER TABLE related_item ADD CONSTRAINT FK_related_item_related_item_client_id FOREIGN KEY (related_item_client_id, relatedItemId) REFERENCES item (item_client_id, itemId);
ALTER TABLE item ADD CONSTRAINT FK_item_item_client_id FOREIGN KEY (item_client_id) REFERENCES client (ID);
Please include the stack trace. However, I strongly recommend you skip the #JoinColumn tags unless you have a VERY good reason for specifying the foreign keys yourself. By specifying the mappedBy attribute in one of the directions, JPA can figure out what to do by itself.
Java EE 6 and JPA put a lot of effort into enabling Convention over Configuration, which means that most of the time, things will work out of the box. It's desirable for you, the programmer because you have less boiler plate code to worry about, and it's desirable for the JPA and Jave EE container implementors because it gives them freedom to chose the best performing solutions. By declaring the foreign key relationships yourself, you rob both you and JPA of this advantage.
Edit: In fact, I suspect that both specifying mappedBy and specifying the #JoinTable could be the root cause of your problem. But I need to see the stack trace to tell for sure.
The order of the columns should not matter. If it does, then you could change the order in your index to match, or change the order you list your primary key in, or just use your scripts to generate your DDL.
Related
I have a basic spring application, with a simple entity. I have a flyway script, to create the postgres table, and add some starting data.
create table user (
id serial primary key,
username varchar (50) unique not null,
password varchar (150) not null
);
insert into user (id, username, password) values (1, 'name', 'somehashed');
insert into etc...
I've set up my entity as follows:
#Entity
#Table(name = "user")
public class User {
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY)
#Column(name = "id", updatable = false, columnDefinition = "serial")
private Long id;
...
other fields, constructor, getters setters etc...
My problem is, that on start-up, the basic entities are persisted by flyway, but upon trying to save a new entity, hibernate tries to give it the ID 1, although it is already given to another one.
I tried it also with SEQUENCE strategy, the problem didn't get solved.
Ok, problem was that I specified explicitly the ID I wanted to give while the insert script, and I didn't let postgres do the magic...
I'm trying to use Map in Spring Data JPA to handle the relationship to store records of equipment quantity.
I followed this guide to create the entity.
Meeting{
#Id
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY)
#Column(name = "meeting_id", updatable = false)
#JsonIgnore
private int id;
#ElementCollection
#MapKeyColumn(name = "equipment_type")
#MapKeyEnumerated(EnumType.STRING)
private Map<EquipmentType, Integer> equipment = new HashMap<>();
}
EquipmentType is an Enum.
This is the table for the property:
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS meeting_equipment (
meeting_id INTEGER NOT NULL REFERENCES meeting (meeting_id),
equipment_type VARCHAR(10) NOT NULL,
quantity INTEGER NOT NULL DEFAULT 0
);
Once I try to create a meeting entity, I get error ERROR:column "meeting_meeting_id" of relation "meeting_equipment" does not exist
May I know what's the problem here?
Your table meeting_equipment does not match what JPA is expecting.
It has a column meeting_id but your JPA implementation expects meeting_meeting_id
Either rename the column to the expected meeting_meeting_id or configure your mapping to use the current column name. I think this might do the trick:
#JoinTable(joinColumns={#JoinColumn(name="meeting_id")}
Of course, you probably can create your own naming strategy if you have many cases like this and want to keep your column names as they are.
I have two Entities related by a ManyToMany and I want to select them via a named Query. This works in my test (with a H2 DB set up) and throws exceptions at runtime (with postgresql set up). Other than the H2 and PG I am hard pressed to find differences between test and production.
The Entities and the Query look like so (abbreviated):
#Entity(name = "Enrichment")
#Table(name = "mh_Enrichment")
NamedQueries({
#NamedQuery(name = "findByLink",
query = "SELECT e FROM Enrichment e INNER JOIN e.links l WHERE l.link in (:links)") })
public class EnrichmentImpl {
#Id
#Column(name = "enrichmentId")
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO)
private long id;
#ManyToMany
#JoinTable(name = "mh_EnrichmentLinks", joinColumns = { #JoinColumn(name = "EnrichmentId",
referencedColumnName = "enrichmentId") }, inverseJoinColumns = { #JoinColumn(name = "Link",
referencedColumnName = "link") })
private List<Link> links;
}
#Entity(name = "Link")
#Table(name = "mh_enrichment_link")
public class LinksImpl {
#Id
#Column(name = "link", length = 1024)
private String link;
}
Upon running the query with a String value in production I get:
Internal Exception: org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: ERROR: operator does not exist: character varying = bigint
Hinweis: No operator matches the given name and argument type(s). You might need to add explicit type casts.
Position: 215
Error Code: 0
Call: SELECT t1.enrichmentId FROM mh_enrichment_link t0, mh_EnrichmentLinks t2, mh_Enrichment t1 WHERE ((t0.link IN (?)) AND ((t2.EnrichmentId = t1.enrichmentId) AND (t0.link = t2.Link)))
Any ideas what's wrong? It is the query, isn't it?
The query is supposed to retrieve a list of Enrichments that are related to the given link.
Update #1
As requested: the tables in the DB look as follows:
For entity Link
CREATE TABLE mh_enrichment_link
(
link character varying(1024) NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT mh_enrichment_link_pkey PRIMARY KEY (link)
)
For entity Enrichment
CREATE TABLE mh_enrichment
(
enrichmentid bigint NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT mh_enrichment_pkey PRIMARY KEY (enrichmentid)
)
For the relation (See answer, this was where it went wrong)
CREATE TABLE mh_enrichmentlinks
(
link character varying(1024) NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT mh_enrichment_link_pkey PRIMARY KEY (link)
)
The issue was fixed by dropping all related tables and having JPA regenerate them. Table definitions didn't match Entity definitions.
Thats also the quite obviously the reason why the test worked and the production didn't. In testing the tables are generated on runtime, in production they existed already (with an outdated definition).
Side note: The query is correct and does what it should.
I'm using Playframework 1.2.4 and PostgresSQL 9.1.2. I have the following entities: Recipe and RecipeItem. A Recipe has a set of RecipeItems. I've annotated the set of recipe items in the Recipe class as follows:
#Required
#MinSize(1)
#OneToMany(cascade = CascadeType.ALL, fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
#JoinTable( name = "RecipeItemForIngredients",
joinColumns = #JoinColumn(name = "recipeId"),
inverseJoinColumns = #JoinColumn(name = "recipeItemId"),
uniqueConstraints = #UniqueConstraint(name = "uq_recipeItemPerRecipe",
columnNames = {"recipeId", "recipeItemId"}))
public Set<RecipeItem> items = Sets.newHashSet();
But when I check the PgAdmin to see if the constraint has been applied to the RecipeItemForIngredients table I cannot find it. This is what PgAdmin shows.
CREATE TABLE recipeitemforingredients
(
recipeid bigint NOT NULL,
recipeitemid bigint NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT recipeitemforingredients_pkey PRIMARY KEY (recipeid, recipeitemid),
CONSTRAINT fk5ac547a883708db FOREIGN KEY (recipeid)
REFERENCES recipe (id) MATCH SIMPLE
ON UPDATE NO ACTION ON DELETE NO ACTION,
CONSTRAINT fk5ac547ad6e1da8f FOREIGN KEY (recipeitemid)
REFERENCES "recipe$recipeitem" (id) MATCH SIMPLE
ON UPDATE NO ACTION ON DELETE NO ACTION,
CONSTRAINT recipeitemforingredients_recipeitemid_key UNIQUE (recipeitemid)
)
Does anyone have an idea why this could be happening? Maybe this annotation is not supported by the ORM used by Playframework.
This constraint doesn't make much sense, and you have a stronger constraint by default anyway:
CONSTRAINT recipeitemforingredients_recipeitemid_key UNIQUE (recipeitemid)
If recipeItemId is unique, then of course, the tuple (recipeId, recipeItemId) is also unique.
Moreover, since the PK of the table is (recipeId, recipeItemId), the constraint is already applied by the PK constraint.
Wondering how to do what is specified in How to have 2 collections of the same type in JPA?, but with EclipseLink rather than Hibernate. See that post below:
I've got 2 entities in JPA: Entry and
Comment. Entry contains two
collections of Comment objects.
#OneToMany(fetch = FetchType.EAGER, cascade = CascadeType.ALL)
#IndexColumn(base = 1, name = "dnr")
private List<Comment> descriptionComments = new ArrayList<Comment>();
#OneToMany(fetch = FetchType.EAGER, cascade = CascadeType.ALL)
#IndexColumn(base = 1, name = "pmnr")
private List<Comment> postMortemComments = new ArrayList<Comment>();
To store such objects, JPA+Hibernate
creates "Entry" table, "Comment" table
and SINGLE "Entry_Comment":
create table Entry_Comment (Entry_id
integer not null,
postMortemComments_id integer not
null, pmnr integer not null,
descriptionComments_id integer not
null, dnr integer not null, primary
key (Entry_id, dnr), unique
(descriptionComments_id), unique
(postMortemComments_id))
Storing of objects fail as
descriptionComments_id and
postMortemComments_id cannot be "not
null" at the same time.
How do I store object containing two
collections of the same type using
JPA+Hibernate?
I am sure it is pretty simple to convert that solution to EclipseLink, but I cannot seem to figure it out. Thanks
You can explicitly specify the names of the join tables by #JoinTable