Search Results

Search found 545 results on 22 pages for 'cascade'.

Page 3/22 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Hibernate + Spring : cascade deletion ignoring non-nullable constraints

    - by E.Benoît
    Hello, I seem to be having one weird problem with some Hibernate data classes. In a very specific case, deleting an object should fail due to existing, non-nullable relations - however it does not. The strangest part is that a few other classes related to the same definition behave appropriately. I'm using HSQLDB 1.8.0.10, Hibernate 3.5.0 (final) and Spring 3.0.2. The Hibernate properties are set so that batch updates are disabled. The class whose instances are being deleted is: @Entity( name = "users.Credentials" ) @Table( name = "credentials" , schema = "users" ) public class Credentials extends ModelBase { private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L; /* Some basic fields here */ /** Administrator credentials, if any */ @OneToOne( mappedBy = "credentials" , fetch = FetchType.LAZY ) public AdminCredentials adminCredentials; /** Active account data */ @OneToOne( mappedBy = "credentials" , fetch = FetchType.LAZY ) public Account activeAccount; /* Some more reverse relations here */ } (ModelBase is a class that simply declares a Long field named "id" as being automatically generated) The Account class, which is one for which constraints work, looks like this: @Entity( name = "users.Account" ) @Table( name = "accounts" , schema = "users" ) public class Account extends ModelBase { private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L; /** Credentials the account is linked to */ @OneToOne( optional = false ) @JoinColumn( name = "credentials_id" , referencedColumnName = "id" , nullable = false , updatable = false ) public Credentials credentials; /* Some more fields here */ } And here is the AdminCredentials class, for which the constraints are ignored. @Entity( name = "admin.Credentials" ) @Table( name = "admin_credentials" , schema = "admin" ) public class AdminCredentials extends ModelBase { private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L; /** Credentials linked with an administrative account */ @OneToOne( optional = false ) @JoinColumn( name = "credentials_id" , referencedColumnName = "id" , nullable = false , updatable = false ) public Credentials credentials; /* Some more fields here */ } The code that attempts to delete the Credentials instances is: try { if ( account.validationKey != null ) { this.hTemplate.delete( account.validationKey ); } this.hTemplate.delete( account.languageSetting ); this.hTemplate.delete( account ); } catch ( DataIntegrityViolationException e ) { return false; } Where hTemplate is a HibernateTemplate instance provided by Spring, its flush mode having been set to EAGER. In the conditions shown above, the deletion will fail if there is an Account instance that refers to the Credentials instance being deleted, which is the expected behaviour. However, an AdminCredentials instance will be ignored, the deletion will succeed, leaving an invalid AdminCredentials instance behind (trying to refresh that instance causes an error because the Credentials instance no longer exists). I have tried moving the AdminCredentials table from the admin DB schema to the users DB schema. Strangely enough, a deletion-related error is then triggered, but not in the deletion code - it is triggered at the next query involving the table, seemingly ignoring the flush mode setting. I've been trying to understand this for hours and I must admit I'm just as clueless now as I was then.

    Read the article

  • Applying different Cascade Style Sheets to the same html page

    - by Noona
    To apply a CSS to an existing html page I need to add a link that links to the css file, I am asked to include a link in the webpage that I am building that would link to the same html page but with a different css file, I am thinking I need to create a different css file, then create another .html page by copy the exact content from the first page and only change the link of the css file, but it doesn't seem so efficient and I am assuming there should be a standard method to do this. thanks

    Read the article

  • Is Delete cascade possible in ravendb

    - by user1811801
    Still just a starter in ravendb. I have a doubt whether raven db supports some kind of referential integrity. Here is my doubt and work.. I have document type screens as below public class Screens { public String Id { get; set; } public String ScreenName { get; set; } } And Another document named RightsDeclaration as below public class RightsDeclaration { public RightsDeclaration() { _screenrights = new List<ScreenRight>(); } public String Id { get; set; }// Role Name List<ScreenRight> _screenrights; public List<ScreenRight> ScreenRights { get { return _screenrights; } set { _screenrights = value; } } } Now the screen rights class looks like below with the screen name field as below public class ScreenRight : { public String ScreenName { get; set; } public Boolean Create { get; set; } public Boolean Read { get; set; } public Boolean Update { get; set; } public Boolean Delete { get; set; } public Boolean Approve { get; set; } public Boolean Access { get; set; } public Boolean Print { get; set; } public Boolean Email { get; set; } } Now first i will create some list of screens and then i assign rights for each role with mentioning what is the screen name and list of rights. up to this point everything goes fine. Now in a scenario where if i would delete the screen name in screens class but then the screen rights for that screen still exists in the rights declaration. is it possible to delete the corresponding screen rights from userrights document too? if so please mention the query or idea to do the above.. Thanks in advance..

    Read the article

  • Block Cascade Json Serealize?

    - by CrazyJoe
    I have this Class: public class User { public string id{ get; set; } public string name{ get; set; } public string password { get; set; } public string email { get; set; } public bool is_broker { get; set; } public string branch_id { get; set; } public string created_at{get; set;} public string updated_at{get; set;} public UserGroup UserGroup {get;set;} public UserAddress UserAddress { get; set; } public List<UserContact> UserContact {get; set;} public User() { UserGroup = new UserGroup(); UserAddress = new UserAddress(); UserContact = new List<UserContact>(); } } I like to Serealize Only properties , how i block serealization of UserGroup, UserAdress, asn UserContact??? This is my Serealization function: public static string Serealize<T>(T obj) { System.Runtime.Serialization.Json.DataContractJsonSerializer serializer = new System.Runtime.Serialization.Json.DataContractJsonSerializer(obj.GetType()); MemoryStream ms = new MemoryStream(); serializer.WriteObject(ms, obj); return Encoding.UTF8.GetString(ms.ToArray(), 0,(int)ms.Length); }

    Read the article

  • Regarding the scrollbar in the cascade menu

    - by Manochitra
    Hi All, I have to solve a defect. The defect is there is a scroll bar attached to the vertical cascading menu. When I try to scroll through the items using the scrollbar , the menu disappears. That is, When i place the mouse over the scrollbar the menu disappears. But when i scroll the items through the mouse, the scrollbar is also moving. Can anyone help me out in this issue? Please forward ur ans to *[email protected]* Thanks, Manochitra.

    Read the article

  • Need to override cascade style

    - by WillingLearner
    i have a style : .window .div { border:medium solid #000000; height:150px; background-color: #0099FF; } and then i have another style: #NewDiv { font:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 24px; height: 20px; border-bottom-width: medium; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: #000000; } I need to put a #NewDiv div tag inside of window .div, BUT... #NewDiv must retain its own styling while sitting inside of window .div div tags. How do I do this? Currently when I try, #NewDiv takes on the same styling as window .div when i place it inside of it and i dont want that at all. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • SQLite3 and "cascade" SELECTion

    - by SK9
    I have a parent table and a child table related to the parent table by some REFERENCE. Suppose I exec a SELECT statement on the child and that it returns the at least one result. Can I arrange for my search to automatically yield all the content of all related parents with this child too? Or must I always take the reference from the child and put this in a second SELECT statement and exec this myself?

    Read the article

  • sqlalchemy: what is the difference between declaring the cascade within the foreign key vs relation?

    - by steve
    what is the difference between declaring the cascade within a foreign key vs relations? class Contact(Base): __tablename__ = 'contacts' id = Column(Integer, primary_key=True) addresses = relation("Address", backref="contact") class Address(Base): __tablename__ = 'addresses' id = Column(Integer, primary_key=True) contact_id = Column(Integer, ForeignKey('contact.id', onupdate="CASCADE", ondelete="CASCADE"))) vs class Contact(Base): __tablename__ = 'contacts' id = Column(Integer, primary_key=True) addresses = relation("Address", backref="contact", cascade="all, delete-orphan") class Address(Base): __tablename__ = 'addresses' id = Column(Integer, primary_key=True) contact_id = Column(Integer, ForeignKey('contact.id')) with the foreign key declaration, it seems like the cascade is enforced at the database level. how does the relations approach work? thanks!

    Read the article

  • Many to Many delete in NHibernate two parents with common association

    - by Joshua Grippo
    I have 3 top level entities in my app: Circuit, Issue, Document Circuits can contain Documents and Issues can contain Documents. When I delete a Circuit, I want it to delete the documents associated with it, unless it is used by something else. I would like this same behavior with Issues. I have it working when the only association is in the same table in the db, but if it is in another table, then it fails due to foreign key constraints. ex 1(This will cascade properly, because there is only a foreign constraint from Circuit to Document) Document1 exists. Circuit1 exists and contains a reference to Document1. If I delete Circuit1 then it deletes Document1 with it. ex 2(This will cascade properly, because there is only a foreign constraint from Circuit to Document.) Document1 exists. Circuit1 exists and contains a reference to Document1. Circuit2 exists and contains a reference to Document1. If I delete Circuit1 then it is deleted, but Document1 is not deleted because Circuit2 exists. If I then delete Circuit2, then Document1 is deleted. ex 3(This will throw an error, because when it deletes the Circuit it sees that there are no other circuits that reference the document so it tries to delete the document. However it should not, because there is an Issue that has a foreign constraint to the document.) Document 1 exists. Circuit1 exists and contains a reference to Document1. Issue1 exists and contains a reference to Document1. If I delete Circuit1, then it fails, because it tries to delete Document1, but Issues1 still has a reference. DB: This think won't let upload an image, so here is the ERD to the DB: http://lh3.ggpht.com/_jZWhe7NXay8/TROJhOd7qlI/AAAAAAAAAGU/rkni3oEANvc/CircuitIssues.gif Model: public class Circuit { public virtual int CircuitID { get; set; } public virtual string CJON { get; set; } public virtual IList<Document> Documents { get; set; } } public class Issue { public virtual int IssueID { get; set; } public virtual string Summary { get; set; } public virtual IList<Model.Document> Documents { get; set; } } public class Document { public virtual int DocumentID { get; set; } public virtual string Data { get; set; } } Mapping Files: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <hibernate-mapping xmlns="urn:nhibernate-mapping-2.2" namespace="Model" assembly="Model"> <class name="Circuit" table="Circuit"> <id name="CircuitID"> <column name="CircuitID" not-null="true"/> <generator class="identity" /> </id> <property name="CJON" column="CJON" type="string" not-null="true"/> <bag name="Documents" table="CircuitDocument" cascade="save-update,delete-orphan"> <key column="CircuitID"/> <many-to-many class="Document"> <column name="DocumentID" not-null="true"/> </many-to-many> </bag> </class> </hibernate-mapping> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <hibernate-mapping xmlns="urn:nhibernate-mapping-2.2" namespace="Model" assembly="Model"> <class name="Issue" table="Issue"> <id name="IssueID"> <column name="IssueID" not-null="true"/> <generator class="identity" /> </id> <property name="Summary" column="Summary" type="string" not-null="true"/> <bag name="Documents" table="IssueDocument" cascade="save-update,delete-orphan"> <key column="IssueID"/> <many-to-many class="Document"> <column name="DocumentID" not-null="true"/> </many-to-many> </bag> </class> </hibernate-mapping> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <hibernate-mapping xmlns="urn:nhibernate-mapping-2.2" namespace="Model" assembly="Model"> <class name="Document" table="Document"> <id name="DocumentID"> <column name="DocumentID" not-null="true"/> <generator class="identity" /> </id> <property name="Data" column="Data" type="string" not-null="true"/> </class> </hibernate-mapping> Code: using (ISession session = sessionFactory.OpenSession()) { var doc = new Model.Document() { Data = "Doc" }; var circuit = new Model.Circuit() { CJON = "circ" }; circuit.Documents = new List<Model.Document>(new Model.Document[] { doc }); var issue = new Model.Issue() { Summary = "iss" }; issue.Documents = new List<Model.Document>(new Model.Document[] { doc }); session.Save(circuit); session.Save(issue); session.Flush(); } using (ISession session = sessionFactory.OpenSession()) { foreach (var item in session.CreateCriteria<Model.Circuit>().List<Model.Circuit>()) { session.Delete(item); } //this flush fails, because there is a reference to a child document from issue session.Flush(); foreach (var item in session.CreateCriteria<Model.Issue>().List<Model.Issue>()) { session.Delete(item); } session.Flush(); }

    Read the article

  • nhibernate many to many deletes

    - by asi farran
    I have 2 classes that have a many to many relationship. What i'd like to happen is that whenever i delete one side ONLY the association records will be deleted with no concern which side i delete. simplified model: classes: class Qualification { IList<ProfessionalListing> ProfessionalListings } class ProfessionalListing { IList<Qualification> Qualifications void AddQualification(Qualification qualification) { Qualifications.Add(qualification); qualification.ProfessionalListings.Add(this); } } fluent automapping with overrides: void Override(AutoMapping<Qualification> mapping) { mapping.HasManyToMany(x => x.ProfessionalListings).Inverse(); } void Override(AutoMapping<ProfessionalListing> mapping) { mapping.HasManyToMany(x => x.Qualifications).Not.LazyLoad(); } I'm trying various combinations of cascade and inverse settings but can never get there. If i have no cascades and no inverse i get duplicated entities in my collections. Setting inverse on one side makes the duplication go away but when i try to delete a qualification i get a 'deleted object would be re-saved by cascade'. How do i do this? Should i be responsible for clearing the associations of each object i delete?

    Read the article

  • What is best practice about having one-many hibernate

    - by Patrick
    Hi all, I believe this is a common scenario. Say I have a one-many mapping in hibernate Category has many Item Category: @OneToMany( cascade = {CascadeType.ALL},fetch = FetchType.LAZY) @JoinColumn(name="category_id") @Cascade( value = org.hibernate.annotations.CascadeType.DELETE_ORPHAN ) private List<Item> items; Item: @ManyToOne(targetEntity=Category.class,fetch=FetchType.EAGER) @JoinColumn(name="category_id",insertable=false,updatable=false) private Category category; All works fine. I use Category to fully control Item's life cycle. But, when I am writing code to update Category, first I get Category out from DB. Then pass it to UI. User fill in altered values for Category and pass back. Here comes the problem. Because I only pass around Category information not Item. Therefore the Item collection will be empty. When I call saveOrUpdate, it will clean out all associations. Any suggestion on what's best to address this? I think the advantage of having Category controls Item is to easily main the order of Item and not to confuse bi-directly. But what about situation that you do want to just update Category it self? Load it first and merge? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • When/Why to use Cascading in SQL Server?

    - by Joel Coehoorn
    When setting up foreign keys in SQL Server, under what circumstances should you have it cascade on delete or update, and what is the reasoning behind it? This probably applies to other databases as well. I'm looking most of all for concrete examples of each scenario, preferably from someone who has used them successfully.

    Read the article

  • CascadeType problem in One to Many Relation

    - by Milad.KH
    Hi I have two classes which have a Unidirectional One to Many relation with each other. public class Offer{ ... @OneToMany(cascade=CascadeType.ALL) @JoinTable(name = "Offer_Fields", joinColumns = @JoinColumn(name = "OFFER_ID"), inverseJoinColumns = @JoinColumn(name = "FIELDMAPPER_ID")) private Set<FieldMapper> fields = new HashSet<FieldMapper>(); } public class FieldMapper{ ... } I want to store an Offer with a set of FieldMapper to database. When I Use CascadeType.ALL in my OneToMany, I got this error: org.hibernate.HibernateException: Illegal attempt to associate a collection with two open sessions and when I change CascadeType to something else I got this error: org.hibernate.TransientObjectException: object references an unsaved transient instance - save the transient instance before flushing: com.RCSTT.library.FieldMapper Thanks for your help.

    Read the article

  • What are the Pros and Cons of Cascading delete and updates?

    - by Misnomer
    Hi, Maybe this is sort of a naive question...but I think that we should always have cascading deletes and updates. But I wanted to know are there problems with it and when should we should not do it? I really can't think of a case right now where you would not want to do an cascade delete but I am sure there is one...but what about updates should they be done always? So can anyone please list out the pros and cons of cascading deletes and updates ? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • 1:M relationship in Hibernate and cascading operations

    - by EugeneP
    Table SUBCOURSE references COURSE COURSE(id, name) SUBCOURSE(id, course_id, name) So, 1:M. Hibernate generates for Course: @OneToMany(fetch = FetchType.LAZY, mappedBy = "course", cascade = CascadeType.ALL) public Set getSubCourses() { return this.subCourses; } for Subcourse it generates @ManyToOne(fetch = FetchType.LAZY) @JoinColumn(name = "course_id", nullable = false) public Course getCourse() { return this.course; } Now the problem is that cascading does not work as expected. I want to create a collection of SubCourse objects (Set), fill it and then bind it to setSubCourses() of Course object. Though, having ManyToOne thing in a Subcourses table, I need to manually setCourse() before adding to collection on each object. If I do not do so, an exception is raised. What can you recommend me?

    Read the article

  • Cascade Saves with Fluent NHibernate AutoMapping - Old Anwser Still Valid?

    - by Glenn
    I want to do exactly what this question asks: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/586888/cascade-saves-with-fluent-nhibernate-automapping Using Fluent Nhibernate Mappings to turn on "cascade" globally once for all classes and relation types using one call rather than setting it for each mapping individually. The answer to the earlier question looks great, but I'm afraid that the Fluent Nhibernate API altered its .WithConvention syntax last year and broke the answer... either that or I'm missing something. I keep getting a bunch of name space not found errors relating to the IOneToOnePart, IManyToOnePart and all their variations: "The type or namespace name 'IOneToOnePart' could not be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?)" I've tried the official example dll's, the RTM dll's and the latest build and none of them seem to make VS 2008 see the required namespace. The second problem is that I want to use the class with my AutoPersistenceModel but I'm not sure where to this line: .ConventionDiscovery.AddFromAssemblyOf() in my factory creation method. private static ISessionFactory CreateSessionFactory() { return Fluently.Configure() .Database(SQLiteConfiguration.Standard.UsingFile(DbFile)) .Mappings(m => m.AutoMappings .Add(AutoMap.AssemblyOf<Shelf>(type => type.Namespace.EndsWith("Entities")) .Override<Shelf>(map => { map.HasManyToMany(x => x.Products).Cascade.All(); }) ) )//emd mappings .ExposeConfiguration(BuildSchema) .BuildSessionFactory();//finalizes the whole thing to send back. } Below is the class and using statements I'm trying using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; using System.IO; using FluentNHibernate.Conventions; using FluentNHibernate.Cfg; using FluentNHibernate.Cfg.Db; using NHibernate; using NHibernate.Cfg; using NHibernate.Tool.hbm2ddl; using FluentNHibernate.Mapping; namespace TestCode { public class CascadeAll : IHasOneConvention, IHasManyConvention, IReferenceConvention { public bool Accept(IOneToOnePart target) { return true; } public void Apply(IOneToOnePart target) { target.Cascade.All(); } public bool Accept(IOneToManyPart target) { return true; } public void Apply(IOneToManyPart target) { target.Cascade.All(); } public bool Accept(IManyToOnePart target) { return true; } public void Apply(IManyToOnePart target) { target.Cascade.All(); } } }

    Read the article

  • In symfony/doctrine's schema.yml, where should I put onDelete: CASCADE for a many-to-many relationsh

    - by nselikoff
    I have a many-to-many relationship defined in my Symfony (using doctrine) project between Orders and Upgrades (an Order can be associated with zero or more Upgrades, and an Upgrade can apply to zero or more Orders). # schema.yml Order: columns: order_id: {...} relations: Upgrades: class: Upgrade local: order_id foreign: upgrade_id refClass: OrderUpgrade Upgrade: columns: upgrade_id: {...} relations: Orders: class: Order local: upgrade_id foreign: order_id refClass: OrderUpgrade OrderUpgrade: columns: order_id: {...} upgrade_id: {...} I want to set up delete cascade behavior so that if I delete an Order or an Upgrade, all of the related OrderUpgrades are deleted. Where do I put onDelete: CASCADE? Usually I would put it at the end of the relations section, but that would seem to imply in this case that deleting Orders would cascade to delete Upgrades. Is Symfony + Doctrine smart enough to know what I'm wanting if I put onDelete: CASCADE in the above relations sections of schema.yml?

    Read the article

  • Where'd My Data Go? (and/or...How Do I Get Rid of It?)

    - by David Paquette
    Want to get a better idea of how cascade deletes work in Entity Framework Code First scenarios? Want to see it in action? Stick with us as we quickly demystify what happens when you tell your data context to nuke a parent entity. This post is authored by Calgary .NET User Group Leader David Paquette with help from Microsoft MVP in Asp.Net James Chambers. We got to spend a great week back in March at Prairie Dev Con West, chalk full of sessions, presentations, workshops, conversations and, of course, questions.  One of the questions that came up during my session: "How does Entity Framework Code First deal with cascading deletes?". James and I had different thoughts on what the default was, if it was different from SQL server, if it was the same as EF proper and if there was a way to override whatever the default was.  So we built a set of examples and figured out that the answer is simple: it depends.  (Download Samples) Consider the example of a hockey league. You have several different entities in the league including games, teams that play the games and players that make up the teams. Each team also has a mascot.  If you delete a team, we need a couple of things to happen: The team, games and mascot will be deleted, and The players for that team will remain in the league (and therefore the database) but they should no longer be assigned to a team. So, let's make this start to come together with a look at the default behaviour in SQL when using an EDMX-driven project. The Reference – Understanding EF's Behaviour with an EDMX/DB First Approach First up let’s take a look at the DB first approach.  In the database, we defined 4 tables: Teams, Players, Mascots, and Games.  We also defined 4 foreign keys as follows: Players.Team_Id (NULL) –> Teams.Id Mascots.Id (NOT NULL) –> Teams.Id (ON DELETE CASCADE) Games.HomeTeam_Id (NOT NULL) –> Teams.Id Games.AwayTeam_Id (NOT NULL) –> Teams.Id Note that by specifying ON DELETE CASCADE for the Mascots –> Teams foreign key, the database will automatically delete the team’s mascot when the team is deleted.  While we want the same behaviour for the Games –> Teams foreign keys, it is not possible to accomplish this using ON DELETE CASCADE in SQL Server.  Specifying a ON DELETE CASCADE on these foreign keys would cause a circular reference error: The series of cascading referential actions triggered by a single DELETE or UPDATE must form a tree that contains no circular references. No table can appear more than one time in the list of all cascading referential actions that result from the DELETE or UPDATE – MSDN When we create an entity data model from the above database, we get the following:   In order to get the Games to be deleted when the Team is deleted, we need to specify End1 OnDelete action of Cascade for the HomeGames and AwayGames associations.   Now, we have an Entity Data Model that accomplishes what we set out to do.  One caveat here is that Entity Framework will only properly handle the cascading delete when the the players and games for the team have been loaded into memory.  For a more detailed look at Cascade Delete in EF Database First, take a look at this blog post by Alex James.   Building The Same Sample with EF Code First Next, we're going to build up the model with the code first approach.  EF Code First is defined on the Ado.Net team blog as such: Code First allows you to define your model using C# or VB.Net classes, optionally additional configuration can be performed using attributes on your classes and properties or by using a Fluent API. Your model can be used to generate a database schema or to map to an existing database. Entity Framework Code First follows some conventions to determine when to cascade delete on a relationship.  More details can be found on MSDN: If a foreign key on the dependent entity is not nullable, then Code First sets cascade delete on the relationship. If a foreign key on the dependent entity is nullable, Code First does not set cascade delete on the relationship, and when the principal is deleted the foreign key will be set to null. The multiplicity and cascade delete behavior detected by convention can be overridden by using the fluent API. For more information, see Configuring Relationships with Fluent API (Code First). Our DbContext consists of 4 DbSets: public DbSet<Team> Teams { get; set; } public DbSet<Player> Players { get; set; } public DbSet<Mascot> Mascots { get; set; } public DbSet<Game> Games { get; set; } When we set the Mascot –> Team relationship to required, Entity Framework will automatically delete the Mascot when the Team is deleted.  This can be done either using the [Required] data annotation attribute, or by overriding the OnModelCreating method of your DbContext and using the fluent API. Data Annotations: public class Mascot { public int Id { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } [Required] public virtual Team Team { get; set; } } Fluent API: protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder) { modelBuilder.Entity<Mascot>().HasRequired(m => m.Team); } The Player –> Team relationship is automatically handled by the Code First conventions. When a Team is deleted, the Team property for all the players on that team will be set to null.  No additional configuration is required, however all the Player entities must be loaded into memory for the cascading to work properly. The Game –> Team relationship causes some grief in our Code First example.  If we try setting the HomeTeam and AwayTeam relationships to required, Entity Framework will attempt to set On Cascade Delete for the HomeTeam and AwayTeam foreign keys when creating the database tables.  As we saw in the database first example, this causes a circular reference error and throws the following SqlException: Introducing FOREIGN KEY constraint 'FK_Games_Teams_AwayTeam_Id' on table 'Games' may cause cycles or multiple cascade paths. Specify ON DELETE NO ACTION or ON UPDATE NO ACTION, or modify other FOREIGN KEY constraints. Could not create constraint. To solve this problem, we need to disable the default cascade delete behaviour using the fluent API: protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder) { modelBuilder.Entity<Mascot>().HasRequired(m => m.Team); modelBuilder.Entity<Team>() .HasMany(t => t.HomeGames) .WithRequired(g => g.HomeTeam) .WillCascadeOnDelete(false); modelBuilder.Entity<Team>() .HasMany(t => t.AwayGames) .WithRequired(g => g.AwayTeam) .WillCascadeOnDelete(false); base.OnModelCreating(modelBuilder); } Unfortunately, this means we need to manually manage the cascade delete behaviour.  When a Team is deleted, we need to manually delete all the home and away Games for that Team. foreach (Game awayGame in jets.AwayGames.ToArray()) { entities.Games.Remove(awayGame); } foreach (Game homeGame in homeGames) { entities.Games.Remove(homeGame); } entities.Teams.Remove(jets); entities.SaveChanges();   Overriding the Defaults – When and How To As you have seen, the default behaviour of Entity Framework Code First can be overridden using the fluent API.  This can be done by overriding the OnModelCreating method of your DbContext, or by creating separate model override files for each entity.  More information is available on MSDN.   Going Further These were simple examples but they helped us illustrate a couple of points. First of all, we were able to demonstrate the default behaviour of Entity Framework when dealing with cascading deletes, specifically how entity relationships affect the outcome. Secondly, we showed you how to modify the code and control the behaviour to get the outcome you're looking for. Finally, we showed you how easy it is to explore this kind of thing, and we're hoping that you get a chance to experiment even further. For example, did you know that: Entity Framework Code First also works seamlessly with SQL Azure (MSDN) Database creation defaults can be overridden using a variety of IDatabaseInitializers  (Understanding Database Initializers) You can use Code Based migrations to manage database upgrades as your model continues to evolve (MSDN) Next Steps There's no time like the present to start the learning, so here's what you need to do: Get up-to-date in Visual Studio 2010 (VS2010 | SP1) or Visual Studio 2012 (VS2012) Build yourself a project to try these concepts out (or download the sample project) Get into the community and ask questions! There are a ton of great resources out there and community members willing to help you out (like these two guys!). Good luck! About the Authors David Paquette works as a lead developer at P2 Energy Solutions in Calgary, Alberta where he builds commercial software products for the energy industry.  Outside of work, David enjoys outdoor camping, fishing, and skiing. David is also active in the software community giving presentations both locally and at conferences. David also serves as the President of Calgary .Net User Group. James Chambers crafts software awesomeness with an incredible team at LogiSense Corp, based in Cambridge, Ontario. A husband, father and humanitarian, he is currently residing in the province of Manitoba where he resists the urge to cheer for the Jets and maintains he allegiance to the Calgary Flames. When he's not active with the family, outdoors or volunteering, you can find James speaking at conferences and user groups across the country about web development and related technologies.

    Read the article

  • What is the performance impact of CSS's universal selector?

    - by Bungle
    I'm trying to find some simple client-side performance tweaks in a page that receives millions of monthly pageviews. One concern that I have is the use of the CSS universal selector (*). As an example, consider a very simple HTML document like the following: <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <title>Example</title> <style type="text/css"> * { margin: 0; padding: 0; } </head> <body> <h1>This is a heading</h1> <p>This is a paragraph of text.</p> </body> </html> The universal selector will apply the above declaration to the body, h1 and p elements, since those are the only ones in the document. In general, would I see better performance from a rule such as: body, h1, p { margin: 0; padding: 0; } Or would this have exactly the same net effect? Essentially, what I'm asking is if these rules are effectively equivalent in this case, or if the universal selector has to perform more unnecessary work that I may not be aware of. I realize that the performance impact in this example may be very small, but I'm hoping to learn something that may lead to more significant performance improvements in real-world situations. Thanks for any help!

    Read the article

  • Populating data in multiple cascading dropdown boxes in Access 2007

    - by miCRoSCoPiC_eaRthLinG
    Hello all, I've been assigned the task to design a temporary customer tracking system in MS Access 2007 (sheeeesh!). The tables and relationships have all been setup successfully. But I'm running into a minor problem while trying to design the data entry form for one table... Here's a bit of explanation first. The screen contains 3 dropdown boxes (apart from other fields). 1st dropdown The first dropdown (cboMarket) represents the Market lets users select between 2 options: Domestic International Since the first dropdown contains only 2 items I didn't bother making a table for it. I added them as pre-defined list items. 2nd dropdown Once the user makes a selection in this one, the second dropdown (cboLeadCategory) loads up a list of Lead Categories, namely, Fairs & Exhibitions, Agents, Press Ads, Online Ads etc. Different sets of lead categories are utilized for the 2 markets. Hence this box is dependent on the 1st one. Structure of the bound table, named Lead_Cateogries for the 2nd combo is: ID Autonumber Lead_Type TEXT <- actually a list that takes up Domestic or International Lead_Category_Name TEXT 3rd dropdown And based on the choice of category in the 2nd one, the third one (cboLeadSource) is supposed to display a pre-defined set of lead sources belonging to the particular category. Table is named Lead_Sources and the structure is: ID Autonumber Lead_Category NUMBER <- related to ID of Lead Categories table Lead_Source TEXT When I make the selection in the 1st dropdown, the AfterUpdate event of the combo is called, which instructs the 2nd dropdown to load contents: Private Sub cboMarket_AfterUpdate() Me![cboLead_Category].Requery End Sub The Row Source of the 2nd combo contains a query: SELECT Lead_Categories.ID, Lead_Categories.Lead_Category_Name FROM Lead_Categories WHERE Lead_Categories.Lead_Type=[cboMarket] ORDER BY Lead_Categories.Lead_Category_Name; The AfterUpdate event of 2nd combo is: Private Sub cboLeadCategory_AfterUpdate() Me![cboLeadSource].Requery End Sub The Row Source of 3rd combo contains: SELECT Leads_Sources.ID, Leads_Sources.Lead_Source FROM Leads_Sources WHERE [Lead_Sources].[Lead_Category]=[Lead_Categories].[ID] ORDER BY Leads_Sources.Lead_Source; Problem When I select Market type from cboMarket, the 2nd combo cboLeadCategory loads up the appropriate Categories without a hitch. But when I select a particular Category from it, instead of the 3rd combo loading the lead source names, a modal dialog is displayed asking me to Enter a Parameter. When I enter anything into this prompt (valid or invalid data), I get yet another prompt: Why is this happening? Why isn't the 3rd box loading the source names as desired. Can any one please shed some light on where I am going wrong? Thanks, m^e

    Read the article

  • Updating a Foreign Key constraint with ON DELETE CASCADE not updating?

    - by Alastair Pitts
    We've realised in our SQL Server 2005 DB that some Foreign Keys don't have the On Delete Cascade property set, which is giving us a couple of referential errors when we try and delete some records. Use the Management Studio I scripted the DROP and CREATESQL's, but it seems that the CREATE isn't working correctly. The DROP: USE [FootprintReports] GO IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM sys.foreign_keys WHERE object_id = OBJECT_ID(N'[dbo].[FK__SUBSCRIPTIONS_Reports]') AND parent_object_id = OBJECT_ID(N'[dbo].[_SUBSCRIPTIONS]')) ALTER TABLE [dbo].[_SUBSCRIPTIONS] DROP CONSTRAINT [FK__SUBSCRIPTIONS_Reports] and the CREATE USE [FootprintReports] GO ALTER TABLE [dbo].[_SUBSCRIPTIONS] WITH CHECK ADD CONSTRAINT [FK__SUBSCRIPTIONS_Reports] FOREIGN KEY([PARAMETER_ReportID]) REFERENCES [dbo].[Reports] ([ID]) ON DELETE CASCADE GO ALTER TABLE [dbo].[_SUBSCRIPTIONS] CHECK CONSTRAINT [FK__SUBSCRIPTIONS_Reports] If I manually change the value of the On Delete in the GUI, after dropping and recreating, the On Delete isn't correctly updated. As a test, I set the Delete rule in the GUI to Set Null. It dropped correctly, and recreated without error. If I got back into the GUI, it is still showing the Set Null as the Delete Rule. Have I done something wrong? or is there another way to edit a constraint to add the ON DELETE CASCADE rule?

    Read the article

  • Nhibernate: One-To-Many mapping problem - Cannot cascade delete without inverse. Set NULL error

    - by KnaveT
    Hi, I have the current scenario whereby an Article has only 1 Outcome each. Each Article may or may not have an Outcome. In theory, this is a one-to-one mapping, but since NHibernate does not really support one-to-one, I used a One-To-Many to substitute. My Primary Key on the child table is actually the ArticleID (FK). So I have the following setup: Classes public class Article { public virtual Int32 ID { get;set;} private ICollection<ArticleOutcome> _Outcomes {get;set;} public virtual ArticleOutcome Outcome { get { if( this._Outcomes !=null && this._Outcomes.Count > 0 ) return this._Outcomes.First(); return null; } set { if( value == null ) { if( this._Outcomes !=null && this._Outcomes.Count > 0 ) this._Outcomes.Clear(); } else { if( this._Outcomes == null ) this._Outcomes = new HashSet<ArticleOutcome>(); else if ( this._Outcomes.Count >= 1 ) this._Outcomes.Clear(); this._Outcomes.Add( value ); } } } } public class ArticleOutcome { public virtual Int32 ID { get;set; } public virtual Article ParentArticle { get;set;} } Mappings public class ArticleMap : ClassMap<Article> { public ArticleMap() { this.Id( x=> x.ID ).GeneratedBy.Identity(); this.HasMany<ArticleOutcome>( Reveal.Property<Article>("_Outcomes") ) .AsSet().KeyColumn("ArticleID") .Cascade.AllDeleteOrphan() //Cascade.All() doesn't work too. .LazyLoad() .Fetch.Select(); } } public class ArticleOutcomeMap : ClassMap<ArticleOutcome> { public ArticleOutcomeMap(){ this.Id( x=> x.ID, "ArticleID").GeneratedBy.Foreign("ParentArticle"); this.HasOne( x=> x.ParentArticle ).Constrained (); //This do not work also. //this.References( x=> x.ParentArticle, "ArticleID" ).Not.Nullable(); } } Now my problem is this: It works when I do an insert/update of the Outcome. e.g. var article = new Article(); article.Outcome = new ArticleOutcome { xxx = "something" }; session.Save( article ); However, I encounter SQL errors when attempting to delete via the Article itself. var article = session.Get( 123 ); session.Delete( article ); //throws SQL error. The error is something to the like of Cannot insert NULL into ArticleID in ArticleOutcome table. The deletion works if I place Inverse() to the Article's HasMany() mapping, but insertion will fail. Does anyone have a solution for this? Or do I really have to add a surrogate key to the ArticleOutcome table?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >