Hi Riccardo, There is also a validateForSave() that might be easier (handles inserts and updates).
mrg On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 8:34 AM Michael Gentry <blackn...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Riccardo, > > The To Dep PK checkbox on the DbEntity isn't really intended to say "this > relationship is required" (that is a by-product). It is designed to assign > a PK from one entity to another. > > Perhaps use a Pre-Persist Callback (ObjEntity tab) to verify the shipment > has a shipment number? > > > https://cayenne.apache.org/docs/4.1/cayenne-guide/#types-of-lifecycle-events > > You could also use validateForInsert() I think, but you should also maybe > do a validateForUpdate() if you go down that path. > > mrg > > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 6:50 AM Riccardo De Menna <deme...@tuorlo.net> > wrote: > >> Hi Michael, >> >> > Try deselecting the "To Dep PK" checkbox on the relationship >> > in SHIPMENT_NUMBER -> SHIPMENT. >> >> I tryed both ToDep directions but they don’t seem to affect the result. >> > >> > I can see how having that checked would make the relationship required >> > because it ties SHIPMENT_NUMBER's PK to SHIPMENT's PK, therefore a >> > SHIPMENT_NUMBER shouldn't exist without a corresponding SHIPMENT and it >> > sounds like you want it to be separate. >> >> But I do expect the reverse relationship to be required… As I undrestood >> it, I would set ToDepPK on the SHIPMENT_NUMBER side and keep it off on the >> SHIPMENT side. I want to be able to generate numbers before having to link >> them to shipments but I also expect shipments non to exist without a number. >> >> BTW, as I said to Nikita, if I forcefully ignore the flag and manually >> bypass my validation code depending on it, the ObjectContext does not seem >> to complain about it and does commit the save. >> >> I assume it’s just the flag being marked as mandatory for some other side >> condition but I still don’t know what to use in the template as a reliable >> replacement. >> >> Riccardo >> >> > >> > mrg >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 12:10 AM Riccardo De Menna <deme...@tuorlo.net> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> Hi Michael, >> >> >> >> Thank you for helping. Yes… you modeled exactly what I described down >> to >> >> the delete rules. I imported your files in modeler and run class >> generation >> >> but I still get the relationship (TO_SHIP in your model) to appear as >> >> mandatory. Could it be an issue in class generation? >> >> >> >> This is a little VE snippet I use in my template to output a static >> list >> >> of mandatory relationships. >> >> >> >> #foreach( $rel in ${object.DeclaredRelationships} ) >> >> #if (${rel.isMandatory()} && !${rel.ToMany} ) >> >> #set($bar = >> >> >> $requiredRelationships.add("${stringUtils.capitalizedAsConstant($rel.Name)}_PROPERTY")) >> >> #end >> >> #end >> >> public static final List<String> REQUIRED_RELATIONSHIPS = List.of( >> >> #foreach( $rel in ${requiredRelationships} ) >> >> ${rel}#if(!$foreach.last),#end >> >> #end >> >> ); >> >> >> >> And contrary to what I would expect, I get this in my superclass: >> >> >> >> public static final List<String> REQUIRED_RELATIONSHIPS = List.of( >> >> TO_SHIP_PROPERTY >> >> ); >> >> >> >> Riccardo De Menna >> >> >> >> >> >>> On 10 Jan 2024, at 01:20, Michael Gentry <blackn...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Hi Riccardo, >> >>> >> >>> I may have completely misunderstood your intention, but here is my >> first >> >>> cut for a model: >> >>> >> >>> cayenne-o2o.xml: >> >>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> >> >>> <domain xmlns="http://cayenne.apache.org/schema/10/domain"; >> >>> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"; >> >>> xsi:schemaLocation="http://cayenne.apache.org/schema/10/domain >> >>> https://cayenne.apache.org/schema/10/domain.xsd"; >> >>> project-version="10"> >> >>> <map name="datamap"/> >> >>> </domain> >> >>> >> >>> datamap.map.xml: >> >>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> >> >>> <data-map xmlns="http://cayenne.apache.org/schema/10/modelMap"; >> >>> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"; >> >>> xsi:schemaLocation="http://cayenne.apache.org/schema/10/modelMap >> >>> https://cayenne.apache.org/schema/10/modelMap.xsd"; >> >>> project-version="10"> >> >>> <property name="defaultLockType" value="1"/> >> >>> <property name="defaultPackage" value="org.test"/> >> >>> <db-entity name="SHIPMENT"> >> >>> <db-attribute name="ID" type="BIGINT" isPrimaryKey="true" >> >> isMandatory="true" >> >>> /> >> >>> </db-entity> >> >>> <db-entity name="SHIPMENT_NUMBER"> >> >>> <db-attribute name="ID" type="BIGINT" isPrimaryKey="true" >> >> isMandatory="true" >> >>>> >> >>> <info:property xmlns:info="http://cayenne.apache.org/schema/10/info"; >> >> name= >> >>> "comment" value="This ID is the same as SHIPMENT's ID."/> >> >>> </db-attribute> >> >>> <db-attribute name="NUM" type="INTEGER"> >> >>> <info:property xmlns:info="http://cayenne.apache.org/schema/10/info"; >> >> name= >> >>> "comment" value="This is the shipment number."/> >> >>> </db-attribute> >> >>> </db-entity> >> >>> <obj-entity name="Shipment" className="org.test.Shipment" lock-type= >> >>> "optimistic" dbEntityName="SHIPMENT"/> >> >>> <obj-entity name="ShipmentNumber" className="org.test.ShipmentNumber" >> >>> lock-type="optimistic" dbEntityName="SHIPMENT_NUMBER"> >> >>> <obj-attribute name="num" type="java.lang.Integer" >> >> db-attribute-path="NUM"/> >> >>> </obj-entity> >> >>> <db-relationship name="toShipNum" source="SHIPMENT" >> >> target="SHIPMENT_NUMBER" >> >>>> >> >>> <db-attribute-pair source="ID" target="ID"/> >> >>> </db-relationship> >> >>> <db-relationship name="toShip" source="SHIPMENT_NUMBER" >> target="SHIPMENT" >> >>> toDependentPK="true"> >> >>> <db-attribute-pair source="ID" target="ID"/> >> >>> </db-relationship> >> >>> <obj-relationship name="toShipNum" source="Shipment" >> >> target="ShipmentNumber" >> >>> deleteRule="Cascade" db-relationship-path="toShipNum"/> >> >>> <obj-relationship name="toShip" source="ShipmentNumber" >> target="Shipment" >> >>> deleteRule="Deny" db-relationship-path="toShip"/> >> >>> </data-map> >> >>> >> >>> Copy/Paste these files somewhere, then try loading them up into your >> 4.2 >> >>> Modeler and see if it is close. >> >>> >> >>> mrg >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 9:54 AM Riccardo De Menna <deme...@tuorlo.net> >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> Hi, >> >>>> >> >>>> Can someone help me understand something? >> >>>> >> >>>> I’m trying to model a one-to-one relationship between two entities >> but I >> >>>> can’t seem to get the relationship to be optional. >> >>>> >> >>>> In my specific case I need to model an entity representing shipments >> >> with >> >>>> a postal service. Each shipment needs to have a number taken from a >> >>>> range/group that is pre-assigned by the postal service. >> >>>> >> >>>> Thus I created a SHIPMENT_NUMBER entity with just an INTEGER >> attribute >> >> and >> >>>> then used that attribute to build the relationship with the SHIPMENT >> >>>> entity. Possibly with “To dep PK” as well. >> >>>> >> >>>> I want the relationship to be optional so that I can generate >> >>>> SHIPMENT_NUMBER as many as I want and populate them with the numbers >> >>>> assigned by the postal service and only later, when the real >> SHIPMENT is >> >>>> actually needed/created, link it with the number in a one-to-one >> >> fashion. >> >>>> >> >>>> I’m not sure why, but my class generated content always shows the >> >>>> relationship as mandatory. >> >>>> >> >>>> Coming from the WebObjects world, I'm used to a modeler that >> explicitly >> >>>> shows checkboxes for isMandatory on relationships like with the >> >> attributes. >> >>>> Here in Cayenne it seems that optionality is implicitly determined >> >> based on >> >>>> the design. >> >>>> >> >>>> Have I misunderstood something? Is my design flawed? >> >>>> >> >>>> Any tip is appreciated. >> >>>> >> >>>> Regards, >> >>>> Riccardo >> >> >> >> >> >>
