Vertical Mapping in 3.0.1

Question

I'm trying to do a vertical mapping and am getting the following exception:
java.lang.ClassCastException
at kodo.jdbc.meta.ClassMapping.resolve(ClassMapping.java:952)
at
kodo.jdbc.meta.VerticalClassMapping.resolve(VerticalClassMapping.java:300)
at kodo.jdbc.meta.MappingRepository.resolve(MappingRepository.java:381)
at kodo.jdbc.meta.MappingRepository.getMapping(MappingRepository.java:298)
at kodo.jdbc.meta.MappingRepository.getMapping(MappingRepository.java:162)
at kodo.jdbc.meta.MappingRepository.getMetaData(MappingRepository.java:150)
My jdo file has:
<class name="ContactInfo" objectid-class="ContactInfoId">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="jdbc-class-map" value="base">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="table"
value="t_contactinfo"/>
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="pk-column" value="id_i"/>
</extension>
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="jdbc-class-ind"
value="in-class-name">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="column"
value="classtype_id_vc"/>
</extension>
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="jdbc-version-ind"
value="version-number">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="column"
value="rowversion_i"/>
</extension>
<field name="id" primary-key="true">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="jdbc-field-map"
value="value">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="column"
value="id_i"/>
</extension>
</field>
<field name="primary">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="jdbc-field-map"
value="value">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="column"
value="primary_b"/>
</extension>
</field>
<field name="person">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="jdbc-field-map"
value="one-one">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="column.id_i"
value="person_id_i"/>
</extension>
</field>
</class>
<class name="AddressContactInfo"
persistence-capable-superclass="ContactInfo" identity-type="application">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="jdbc-class-map"
value="vertical">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="table"
value="t_addresscontactinfo"/>
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="ref-column.id_i"
value="contactinfo_id_i"/>
</extension>
<field name="address1">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="jdbc-field-map"
value="value">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="column"
value="address1_vc"/>
</extension>
</field>
<field name="address2">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="jdbc-field-map"
value="value">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="column"
value="address2_vc"/>
</extension>
</field>
<field name="city">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="jdbc-field-map"
value="value">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="column"
value="address2_vc"/>
</extension>
</field>
<field name="state">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="jdbc-field-map"
value="one-one">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="column.id_vc"
value="state_id_vc"/>
</extension>
</field>
<field name="zip">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="jdbc-field-map"
value="value">
<extension vendor-name="kodo" key="column"
value="zip_vc"/>
</extension>
</field>
</class>
and my database create statements are:
create table t_contactinfo (
id_i int not null primary key,
person_id_i not null CONSTRAINT fk_contactinfo_person REFERENCES
t_person(id_i),
primary_b number(1) not null,
rowversion_i int not null,
classtype_id_vc varchar(255) CONSTRAINT fk_contactinfo_classtype_id
REFERENCES t_classtype(id_vc) not null
create table t_addresscontactinfo (
contactinfo_id_i not null CONSTRAINT fk_adress_contactinfo references
t_contactinfo(id_i),
address1_vc varchar(255),
address2_vc varchar(255),
city_vc varchar(255),
state_id_vc CONSTRAINT fk_address_state references t_state(id_vc),
zip_vc varchar(255),
rowversion_i int not null,
primary key(contactinfo_id_i)
Any idea what the problem is?
Thanks,
Nathan

Answer 1

Ted-
Did this work in 3.0.0?I believe not.
If so, I cannot move until 3.0.2 is released.3.0.2 will be release very soon.
In article <bu9i1l$gt9$[email protected]>, Ted Poovey wrote:
Did this work in 3.0.0? If so, I cannot move until 3.0.2 is released.
Abe White wrote:
You have found a bug. It affects subclasses that map two or more simple
value fields to the same column, so the only current workaround for you
would be to get rid of one of the fields mapped to the address2_vc
column for now.
I've already fixed the bug internally; the fix will be available in 3.0.2.
Thanks for the report.
Marc Prud'hommeaux [email protected]
SolarMetric Inc. http://www.solarmetric.com