Re: weird PK generation

2011-08-09 Thread Michael Gentry
Hey Bruno, I don't think anyone has had time to look at this. Any chance you could put together a sample model for us to use to make sure we are on the same page? Thanks, mrg On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Bruno René Santos wrote: > Hi Michael, > > I have just downgrade to cayenne 3.0.1 an

Re: weird PK generation

2011-08-02 Thread Andrus Adamchik
> Isn't that checkbox automatically checked when it needs to be? No. On Aug 2, 2011, at 12:11 PM, Bruno René Santos wrote: > I don't have it checked, but as I said it works on 3.0.1 and not in 3.0.2... > and the checkbox is empty on both scenarios. Isn't that checkbox > automatically checked w

Re: weird PK generation

2011-08-02 Thread Bruno René Santos
I don't have it checked, but as I said it works on 3.0.1 and not in 3.0.2... and the checkbox is empty on both scenarios. Isn't that checkbox automatically checked when it needs to be? Thanx Bruno On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:45 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote: > Not sure about the 3.0.1 and 3.0.2 differe

Re: weird PK generation

2011-08-01 Thread Andrus Adamchik
Not sure about the 3.0.1 and 3.0.2 difference, but generally such problem is caused by missing "To Dep PK". Do you have "To Dep PK" checked for the failing relationship? Andrus On Aug 1, 2011, at 12:21 AM, Bruno René Santos wrote: > Hi Michael, > > I have just downgrade to cayenne 3.0.1 and t

Re: weird PK generation

2011-07-31 Thread Bruno René Santos
Hi Michael, I have just downgrade to cayenne 3.0.1 and the same code is working now... so maybe someone should look into the 3.0.2 code about this... Regards Bruno Santos On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Michael Gentry wrote: > Hi Bruno, > > For grins, could you possible try doing commitChanges

Re: weird PK generation

2011-07-31 Thread Michael Gentry
Hi Bruno, For grins, could you possible try doing commitChanges() instead of commitChangesToParent()? Just curious if the child context could be in play here. Thanks, mrg On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Bruno René Santos wrote: > Hi Michael, > > This time I am using MySQL. And yes I'm using

Re: weird PK generation

2011-07-31 Thread Bruno René Santos
Hi Michael, This time I am using MySQL. And yes I'm using the org.apache.cayenne.access.dbsync.SkipSchemaUpdateStrategy. I am willing to "fool" cayenne by saying that the key is database generated but being a foreign key that would not be true and also cayenne is ignoring the value i am putting on

Re: weird PK generation

2011-07-31 Thread Michael Gentry
Hi Bruno, I've not tried that scenario before. What database are you using? I believe in the past you said you are using Oracle? If so, maybe set the modeler to use a sequence for that table instead of the default and see if that clears it up. Also, I'm assuming you are skipping the option of

weird PK generation

2011-07-31 Thread Bruno René Santos
Hello all, I have a dbEntity with thre foreign keys that are also its primary keys. During the application I fill all three fields correctly with the objects that should be referenced. Before the commitchangestoparent I check the newObjects array and all objects are filled correctly. On the Model