Re: [eclipselink-users] problem with remove on bidirectional oneToMany e

[christopher delahunt <christopher.delahunt@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Yannick,

father.getSonsCollection().remove(son);  is equivalent to

List<Son> sons = father.getSonsCollection();
sons.remove(son);
father.setSonsCollection(sons);

so entityManager.merge(father)  will be required in either case if 
father is detached.  Try em.contains(father) before the merge to see if 
it is managed or not.  If father is a managed entity, the change to the 
sons collection should be picked up without the merge call.

Best Regards,
Chris

Yannick Majoros wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We have two entity classes, Father and Son
>
> We are in an EJB environment, transactions are managed automatically.
>
> When a son is removed, we used to do this:
>
> father.getSonsCollection().remove(son);
> entityManager.remove(son);
>
> It seems that the cache gets corrupted if we don't do this after those 
> two lines:
>
> entityManager.merge(father);
>
> Is this right? I would think it isn't, "father" should be 
> automatically updated (in cache, thus).
>
> Or should I write this:
>
> List<Son> sons = father.getSonsCollection();
> sons.remove(son);
> father.setSonsCollection(sons);
>
> without entityManager.merge(fatcher)
>
> Thanks,
>
> Yannick Majoros
> _______________________________________________
> eclipselink-users mailing list
> eclipselink-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-users