This is related to this question, but the example below is shorter, so I figured another question on this would make sense.
I have two entities, A and B, in a one-to-one relationship. For an A, a B is optional, and every B must have an A. I want to cascade deletes from A to B. Here's my first attempt:
@Entity
public class A extends Model {
@Id
private Long id;
@OneToOne(optional = true, mappedBy = "a", cascade = CascadeType.REMOVE, orphanRemoval = true)
private B b;
}
@Entity
public class B extends Model {
@Id
private Long id;
@OneToOne(optional = false)
private A a;
}
However, it seems like Ebean ignores the "optional" annotation, because when I execute a find for a saved A with id 1, the following SQL is executed:
select t0.id c0, t1.id c1
from a t0
join b t1 on t1.a_id = t0.id
where t0.id = 1
In other words, it does an inner instead of a left join, which causes the find to fail when there's no associated B. I've tried various combinations of @JoinColumn
, etc. to no avail. The only somewhat satisfactory workaround I've found is to model A-to-B as a "fake" one-to-many relationship. Is there a better solution? Is this a bug or is it a known/stated limitation of Ebean?
I have found the solution. I switched the direction of this mapping. So I removed mappedBy = "a"
from A
class and added mappedBy = "b"
in B
class.
So the code now looks this way:
@Entity
public class A extends Model {
@Id
private Long id;
@OneToOne(optional = true, cascade = CascadeType.REMOVE, orphanRemoval = true)
private B b;
...
}
@Entity
public class B extends Model {
@Id
private Long id;
@OneToOne(optional = false, mappedBy = "b")
private A a;
private String name;
...
}
I added name
field in B class to make this test more interesting.
My test medhod:
@Test
public void abTest () {
FakeApplication app = Helpers.fakeApplication(Helpers.inMemoryDatabase());
Helpers.start(app);
A a = new A();
B b = new B();
a.setId(1L);
b.setId(2L);
a.setB(b);
b.setA(a);
b.setName("bbb");
Ebean.save(b);
Ebean.save(a);
A fa = Ebean.find(A.class, 1L);
System.out.println("a.id: "+fa.getId());
System.out.println("a.b.id: "+fa.getB());
System.out.println("a.b.name: "+fa.getB().getName());
A a1 = new A();
a1.setId(3L);
Ebean.save(a1);
A fa1 = Ebean.find(A.class, 3L);
System.out.println("a1.id: "+fa1.getId());
System.out.println("a1.b.id: "+fa1.getB());
B fb = Ebean.find(B.class, 2L);
System.out.println("b.id: "+fb.getId());
System.out.println("b.name: "+fb.getName());
System.out.println("b.a.id: "+fb.getA().getId());
}
And the result of this test is:
[debug] c.j.b.PreparedStatementHandle - insert into b (id, name) values (2,'bbb')
[debug] c.j.b.PreparedStatementHandle - insert into a (id, b_id) values (1,2)
[debug] c.j.b.PreparedStatementHandle - select t0.id c0, t0.b_id c1 from a t0 where t0.id = 1
a.id: 1
a.b.id: models.B@2
[debug] c.j.b.PreparedStatementHandle - select t0.id c0, t0.name c1, t1.id c2 from b t0 left outer join a t1 on t1.b_id = t0.id where t0.id = 2
a.b.name: bbb
[debug] c.j.b.PreparedStatementHandle - insert into a (id, b_id) values (3,'[SQL NULL of type -5]')
[debug] c.j.b.PreparedStatementHandle - select t0.id c0, t0.b_id c1 from a t0 where t0.id = 3
a1.id: 3
a1.b.id: null
[debug] c.j.b.PreparedStatementHandle - select t0.id c0, t0.name c1, t1.id c2 from b t0 left outer join a t1 on t1.b_id = t0.id where t0.id = 2
b.id: 2
b.name: bbb
b.a.id: 1
So this code works good no matter if A.b
is null
or not. As we can see in log there is now left outer join
instead of join
.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With