


























NHibernate Cascades: the different between all, all-delete-orphans and save-update
I have posted in the past about NHibernate's cascade being one of the places that require careful attention. But I run into an issue with it yesterday.
The issue was that we had a typical parent-children scenario, but the requirement changed and we had to support orphans. That is, children without a parent. This isn't that big of a deal, after all, and I told Imperial to just change the cascade from all-delete-orphans to all, and forgot about it.
I was called a few minutes afterward, and saw that the change didn't have the desired effect. The scenario that we were working on was deleting the parent, where the child needed to remain behind (will null foreign key, of course). Now, I was being stupid, and I started debugging into NHibernate to figure out what was the cause of this "bug". Ten minutes later (took a while to find where exactly this was happening), I had an "Oh, I am so dumb" moment.
So, to save myself from future embarassment, let me try to articulate what it means:
NHibernate Cascades:
Entities has assoications to other objects, this may be an assoication to a single item (many-to-one) or an assoication to a collection (one-to-many, many-to-any).
At any rate, you are able to tell NHibernate to automatically traverse an entity's assoications, and act according to the cascade option. For instnace, adding an unsaved entity to a collection with save-update cascade will cause it to be saved along with its parent object, without any need for explicit instructions on our side.
Here is what each cascade option means:
Fairly simple, isn't it? I have no idea why I managed to forget this. At any rate, my issue was that I set the cascade to all, and then deleted to root object, which naturally deleted all the child objects. Setting it to save-update was what I wanted to do, once I did that, everything went just fine.
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理,仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。