It used to be true that the reverse db relationship was required, but the reverse obj relationship was not required. From the application's point of view, it doesn't have to be there.
On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Joseph Schmidt <joseph_schmid...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Does Cayenne require the use of a reversed relationship always? > > Of course they're practical, but in many schemes e.g. in the case of the > 'user' table, just too many other tables (~2/3 of them) point to it because > of the required "updated_by_user_id". > > If reversed relationships would be required, than in this case the User > entity would be totally bloated with reverse list attributes to almost all > other entities. > > What is the best strategy to map in this case? > > Thanks, > Joseph. > > > > >
