Collection content and many-many relation

Question

I have a collection mapped on an intermediate table with the many-many
system.
when I read the content of the collection, I find all the expected entries
but also container of the collection.
for example, if a person contains a collection of cars, in the collection I
find all the cars of the person but also the person.
Is there any explanation for that ?

Answer 1

First of all, I do not understand how it could be possible for a JDO
implementation to provide a heterogeneous collection whereas it is defined
in the jdo file that it is not heterogeneous.
In this case, I've defined in the metadata that the collection contains Cars
and Kodo return Cars and Persons.
My database is fully consistent and I do not understand how it could not be
consistent in such cases.
The same application is also used on other JDO implementations ( LiDO ) for
my tests and everything works well.
The differences between the application with LiDO and Kodo in this
application are only located in the settings and the mapping.
Here is my mapping, I think my setting are not involved in the problem :
<class name="Car">
<jdbc-class-map type="base" table="CARS"/>
<field name="id">
<jdbc-field-map type="value" column="ID"/>
</field>
<field name="name">
<jdbc-field-map type="value" column="NAME"/>
</field>
</class>
<class name="Person">
<jdbc-class-map type="base" table="PERSONS"/>
<field name="cars">
<jdbc-field-map type="many-many" element-column.ID="CAR_ID"
ref-column.ID="PERS_ID" table="PERS_CARS"/>
</field>
<field name="id">
<jdbc-field-map type="value" column="ID"/>
</field>
</class>
Unfortunately it is not possible to send my application nor to invest time
creating test-cases.
If you have some test-cases, I would be please to compare them to my
application.
Thx
"Abe White" <[email protected]> a __crit dans le message de
news:[email protected]...
Do the owner class and the collection's element type share a common
ancestor? If so, then have you checked to be sure that the database's
data doesn't have the owner in the collection, and Kodo isn't just
reading the data as-is?
Either way, I would check your application logic first. We have lots
and lots of customers using m-m relations, and no one has ever reported
an error like this. It also hasn't shown up in any of our internal m-m
tests. So my first guesses are that either your database's data has the
owner within the collection, or you are putting the owner in the
collection in your application logic.
If you find that this is not the case and can reproduce the problem,
please send your test case to [email protected] and we'll be
happy to check it out.