12/05/2010 19:32, Andersen Max wrote: > We integrated naming strategy into Eclipse JPA tooling so when it checks if a table/column > exists it won't just use the JPA defaults. > > And I assume Dimitry found some inconsistency in that work. > But yeah, i'm also not fully following what Dimitry's problem is beyond > why @Entity(name="e.M11") doesn't result in e_M11 as table name ? > > I created a table to show you what I think: NSMethod /Annotation @Entity(name="x.y") @Tablename="(x.y") classToTableName x.y - tableName - x.y collectionTableName y x.y foreignKeyColumnName y x.y I expect to see the same values for whole column. @Table is ok - hibernate leaves "x.y" to the NamingStrategy implementator. He will decide what to do with the dot. But what about @Entity? Sometimes we say him the "name of the package", sometimes not. This is strange and looks like a bug. Dmitry. > /max > > On May 12, 2010, at 18:12, Emmanuel Bernard wrote: > > > >> You guys lost me, I'm out of context. >> Any change I get the actual naming strategy code, the Hibernate Annotations and Core version you are talking about and more important what are you guys trying to do :) >> >> On 12 mai 2010, at 18:02, Andersen Max wrote: >> >> >> >>> On May 12, 2010, at 16:54, Dmitry Geraskov wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> Hi, Emmanuel, >>>> >>>> The problem is in interpretation of specified names with dots. >>>> >>>> I created naming strategy where all method just join all passed parameters with "_". >>>> For example >>>> @Override >>>> public String collectionTableName(String ownerEntity, String ownerEntityTable, String associatedEntity, >>>> String associatedEntityTable, String propertyName) { >>>> return ownerEntity + "_"+ associatedEntity+ "_" + associatedEntityTable + "_" + associatedEntity + >>>> "_" +propertyName; >>>> } >>>> >>>> >>>> And what I have found: >>>> >>>> @Entity(name = "e.M11") >>>> public class ManyToMany1 implements Serializable { >>>> >>>> } >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> but that is not a collection table - its an Entity Table ... >>> >>> >>> >>>> What do you think will be DB table name? The correct answer is "e.M11". >>>> >>>> >>> I would have assumed e_M11 ....so yeah thats a bit surprising. >>> >>> >>> >>>> The same for @Entity @Table(name = "e.M11") >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Here you are overriding namingstrategy so that shouldn't be surprising. >>> >>> >>> >>>> But when this entity is used in relationship mapping as target entity things become different: >>>> for @Entity(name = "e.M11") entity.ManyToMany2_entity.ManyToMany1_M11_entity.ManyToMany1_mtm1 >>>> for @Table(name = "e.M11") entity.ManyToMany2_entity.ManyToMany1_e.M11_entity.ManyToMany1_mtm1 >>>> >>>> >>> I'm not seeing this as different. In one case you are saying naming strategy should do its thing Entity(name="e.M11") >>> and in the other you override it (i.e. @Table(name="e.M11"). >>> >>> Remember name on entity is for *entity*-name not table name. >>> >>> >>> >>>> I didn't see any specification for how NamingStrategy should be used. And I even *fear* to compare this behaviour with core hibernate behaviour. I guess there will be some differences too. >>>> >>>> >>> I remember emmanuel having fun with mapping JPA naming standards over to Hibernate NamingStrategy especially when >>> it came to collections and entity names ...but I don't recall the conclusion. >>> >>> Surprised entity name's doesn't seem to be processed on equal footing as class names. (i.e. why does @Entity(name="e.M11") not reasult in e_M11 as table name ? >>> >>> /max >>> >>> >>> >> >