Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [eclipselink-users] Eclipselink-7197 Null primary key 
Remember zero counts as a null primary key if your type is a primitive.

./tch



On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 10:18 AM, James Sutherland <jamesssss@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> That is quite odd.  You will need to isolate the specific cases to determine
> the cause.
>
> Start with the obvious of ensuring that none of your objects have a null
> primary key.
>
> One possibility could be if your using property get/set method access.
> Method access can cause corruptions in your object model if the get/set
> methods have side-effects.  Try switching to field access to see if it
> resolves the issue, or search your set methods for side-effects.
>
>
> Andreas König-2 wrote:
>>
>> Hey everybody!
>>
>> I'm quite new to Eclipselink and I have a serious problem here, that I'm
>> trying to understand/solve for over a week now:
>>
>> We have a web application using spring.
>>
>> I create a new object and save it via jpaTemplate.persist();
>> Later I try to load it via jpaTemplate.find().
>> That results in an Eclipselink-7197-error:
>>
>> Exception [EclipseLink-7197] (Eclipse Persistence Services - 1.0.2
>> (Build 20081024)):
>> org.eclipse.persistence.exceptions.ValidationException Exception
>> Description: Null primary key encountered in unit of work clone [null].
>>
>> I don't understand what is going on here. Debugged it down to
>> RepeatableWriteUnitOfWork(UnitOfWorkImpl).commitToDatabaseWithChangeSet:
>> 1321
>>
>> There, the method calculateChanges() is called which throws the exception.
>>
>> I have no clue what is meant by null primary key, as in the database
>> everything seems to be alright. No keys are null, negative or zero.
>> Everything is persisted.
>>
>> Sometimes the same code works in the same scenario. In these cases the
>> commitToDB-Code seems not to be executed....
>>
>> We had the same errors on another part of the system. After setting the
>> cachetype of one dependent object to FULL, the problem doesn't occur
>> anymore...
>>
>>
>> Anyone got an idea? I'm thankful for everything and any explanation (why
>> is there a commit happening?).
>>
>> Thanx in advance,
>>
>> Andi
>>
>>
>> --
>> Andreas König
>> Developer
>>
>>
>
>
> -----
> ---
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/User:James.sutherland.oracle.com James Sutherland
> http://www.eclipse.org/eclipselink/
>  EclipseLink ,  http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/ias/toplink/
> TopLink
> Wiki:  http://wiki.eclipse.org/EclipseLink EclipseLink ,
> http://wiki.oracle.com/page/TopLink TopLink
> Forums:  http://forums.oracle.com/forums/forum.jspa?forumID=48 TopLink ,
> http://www.nabble.com/EclipseLink-f26430.html EclipseLink
> Book:  http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Java_Persistence Java Persistence
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Eclipselink-7197-Null-primary-key-tp20738456p20773918.html
> Sent from the EclipseLink - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> eclipselink-users mailing list
> eclipselink-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-users
>

Back to the top