[hibernate-dev] Default access type and MappedSuperclass

[andrea boriero]

yes also for the MappedSuperclass

from:

@MappedSuperclass
public abstract class AbstractCatalogEntity {
@Column( name = "CODE")
private String code;

@Column( name = "NAME")
private String name;
}

@Entity
public class CatalogEntity extends AbstractCatalogEntity {
@Id
private Long id;
}

I obtained :

@Generated(value = "org.hibernate.jpamodelgen.JPAMetaModelEntityProcessor")
@StaticMetamodel(AbstractCatalogEntity.class)
public abstract class AbstractCatalogEntity_ {

public static volatile SingularAttribute<AbstractCatalogEntity, String>
code;
public static volatile SingularAttribute<AbstractCatalogEntity, String>
name;

public static final String CODE = "code";
public static final String NAME = "name";

}

@Generated(value = "org.hibernate.jpamodelgen.JPAMetaModelEntityProcessor")
@StaticMetamodel(CatalogEntity.class)
public abstract class CatalogEntity_ extends
org.hibernate.userguide.model.AbstractCatalogEntity_ {

	public static volatile SingularAttribute<CatalogEntity, Long> id;

	public static final String ID = "id";

}




On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 11:52, Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet at gmail.com>
wrote:

> The generated model of the MappedSuperclass?
>
> Because the one of the subclass is correct for sure.
>
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 12:44 PM andrea boriero <andrea at hibernate.org>
> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure I have fully understood the issue, the @Id may be not
>> defined in the MappedSuperclass but for sure it must be in the subclasses
>> extending it.
>>
>> I have tried and I can reproduce the issue only if I do not specify
>> any @Id annotation in the subclass, but as soon as I add the @Id to a
>> subclass of the MappedSuperclass the generated static metamodel is correct.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 11:04, Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> We recently had this issue opened about us not choosing the right access
>>> type for a mapped super class:
>>> https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/HHH-12938 .
>>>
>>> Hibernate currently base the access type decision on the sole placement
>>> of
>>> the @Id annotation, which, in the case of a @MappedSuperclass might not
>>> be
>>> defined (this is the OP's case).
>>>
>>> I closed the issue explaining what we do and pointing a workaround but
>>> the
>>> OP rightfully replied with the JPA spec saying "The default access type
>>> of
>>> an entity hierarchy is determined by the placement of mapping annotations
>>> on the attributes of the entity classes and mapped superclasses of the
>>> entity hierarchy that do not explicitly specify an access type".
>>>
>>> I'm wondering if we should also consider the @Column annotations
>>> placement
>>> if there is no @Id annotation.
>>>
>>> If the answer is that it's already fixed in 6, it's all good for me :).
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Guillaume
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> hibernate-dev mailing list
>>> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>>>
>>