I was having an intermittent NHibernate issue that turned out to be caused by having an hbm mapping to a class as well as a Fluent NHibernate mapping. This was unintentional and once discovered I dropped the hbm mapping and all works well now. My question is this: are there situation where having multiple mappings on a class/table would be valid and/or useful? If not is there a way of detecting redundant mappings in a unit test so it could be guaranteed not to happen?
Thanks,
Matthew
No, having multiple mappings for the same class is never valid. I can't think of a case where it would be useful either.
A unit test for this is easy: just check that DuplicateMappingException isn't thrown when building the SessionFactory.
Related
I want to do code coverage for Fluent Nhibernate mappingfiles.Please tell me how to proceed if possible with sample code. I was able to unit test the mapping file using persistence configuration but unable to get code coverage for it.
Thanks in advance.
If you just want to get code coverage on the ClassMap mapping classes then simply creating an instance of each class will give you that. I'd question the usefulness of doing that since all it gains you is: "yup, I can create an instance of that class so class constructors in .NET really work." I'd consider verifying the correctness of the mapping class more important than just exercising its constructor. This blog post has some good ideas on verifying mapping classes.
And here goes yet another question on NHibernate.
This one most likely doesn't have a desired answer, but still - let's give it a try.
I'm currently putting all the efforts into mapping a domain model onto the database using NHibernate. This domain model comes from a framework which is heavily obfuscated. (Not that I have worked a lot with obfuscated code before, but this one in most of the places can be translated neither by Reflector, nor by Resharper.)
Everything went more or less fine until I faced an entity with a required many-to-one relationship represented by a property with no setter with obfuscated backed field.
Is it possible to reference this obfuscated field somehow? A very special IPropertyAccessor?
If not, how can I load a fully constructed entity? The only option to inject a related object is by using a constructor that accepts it. But at the time of instantiating of an entity being loaded, neither IInstantiator nor IInterceptor has any data of it apart from the key. Any other extension points that suit my need?
To allow NHibernate to access your field instead of property you can use this in your mappings:
access="field"
I have a situation where I have a Common.Domain.Person and Specific.Domain.Person.
First one should be provided as a part of a common package.
Second one appears when common package has to be customized to fit the needs of specific project.
In the object model, it can be easily implemented with inheritance.
In the NH mapping, however, I have encountered a small problem.
I can create an NHibernate <subclass> mapping, but that would require me to use an discriminator. However, I know that if specific person class was inherited, then common class instances will never be used within this specific project.
What is the best way to implement this without adding discriminator column to the base class (since there are no different cases to discriminate)?
this is what i wanted and nhibernate supports it using xml entities. Unfortunately this feature has been borked since (at least) NH v2++.
see also Using Doctype in Nhibernate
A work-around could be to inject these properies programmaticaly when you create the SessionFactory (Dynamic Mapping)
see also http://ayende.com/Blog/archive/2008/05/01/Dynamic-Mapping-with-NHibernate.aspx
Just map the Specific.Domain.Person and leave Common.Domain.Person unmapped.
If you are not saving instances of it, NHibernate does not need to know about it.
Is there an easy way to automatically truncate strings using fluent nHibernate mappings. I would prefer to not address this the setters or a custom type, but with something in the mapping files.
If I understand you correctly you want to make sure strings persisted to the database are no longer than a specified length. This sounds like it could be a business concern though and probably does belong in the domain model or as validation logic.
This question appears to have been asked before and the solution was a custom nHibernate UserType. Keep in mind this isn't a custom entity type or base class, this is a custom mapping type that nHibernate can understand.
Automatically truncating strings in NHibernate / SQL Server
If the custom usertype solution isn't to your liking then you could implement a custom interceptor, but I don't believe there is anything in nHibernate that does this "out-of-the-box". However, that is the beauty of nHibernate is that it is very extensible and implementing a custom user type for your situation is not difficult at all.
I have some entity types that I would like to lazy load. However, they have some internal (assembly) fields they expose, but are not used outside that class. These fields are compiler generated (F#) and I cannot change them. The an example exception is:
NHibernate.InvalidProxyTypeException:
The following types may not be used as
proxies: Mappings.MTest: field id#47
should not be public nor internal
I understand why NHibernate is doing this, and how having fields, if I accessed them, would mess up the lazy-loading properties of the proxies that are generated. However, since I know I won't be using the fields, can I override NHibernate somehow?
Is there any way I can say "ignore this field"? I'm using Fluent NHibernate, if that makes it easier.
Edit: I should also note, I'm using NHibernate 2.1.0 Alpha 2.
Edit2: The main gist here is that I want to keep LazyLoading enabled, which means I have to use the proxy generation. Disabling LazyLoading works (no proxies), but sorta defeats the purpose of a nice framework like NHibernate.
I reassembled NHibernate (easier than getting the source and rebuilding) and removed the code that errors on internal/public fields. LazyLoading appears to work just fine without that check. (Although, I'm new to NHibernate and so there are probably scenarios I don't know about.)
Edit:
Ah, there is a property, "use_proxy_validator" that will disable all validation checks. Good enough.
Fluently.Configure()
.ExposeConfiguration(fun cfg ->
cfg.Properties.Add("use_proxy_validator", "false"))...
Just set the lazy property to false,
<class name="OrderLine" table="OrderLine" lazy="false" >
you can read more in:
Must Everything Be Virtual With NHibernate? - http://davybrion.com/blog/2009/03/must-everything-be-virtual-with-nhibernate/
Ofir,
www.TikalK.com
You can use the
[XmlIgnore]
attribute to decorate the fields :)
Can you use an Interface to declare the fields "used" ?http://nhibernate.info/doc/nh/en/index.html#persistent-classes-poco-sealed
"Another possibility is for the class to implement an interface that declares all public members"
I don't know if NH use the same #transient annotation/attribute as the JAVA version to ignore a property in persistent operations.
You might want to take a look at this page which gives an overview of using F# with Fluent NHibernate.
Edit I just noticed your username. Am I correct in perhaps thinking that this is your blog? How foolish of me. It does seem to address your problem though, specifically "We start off by disabling LazyLoad because most of the properties are not virtual, and NHibernate will fail to validate the mapping. Instead, we explicitly LazyLoad things, like the Store reference."? Maybe I'm just misunderstanding the problem.