Java Persistence with Tertiary Relationship

Thread view:

Harry - 26 Jan 2007 04:59 GMT

Hi All,

As we know, we can perform relationship between two entities, using
@OneToOne, @OneToMany, @ManyToOne, @ManyToMany

Can I use JPA to persist a Tertiary Relationship?

For example, the relationship between User, Role and Module, which can
represent whether a User instance having a particular Role can access a
Module instance.

Thanks,
Harry

Reply to this Message

Danno - 28 Jan 2007 04:10 GMT

> Hi All,
>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> Thanks,
> Harry

That doesn't make sense

Reply to this Message

Harry - 29 Jan 2007 01:32 GMT

Can you elaborate more?
Which part doesn't make sense
and how to solve if I am in this case.

> > Hi All,
>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> > Thanks,
> > HarryThat doesn't make sense

Reply to this Message

Daniel Pitts - 29 Jan 2007 01:41 GMT

> Hi All,
>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> Thanks,
> Harry

So, a User has a specific Roles, and the Roles allow access to
specific Modules?
Would that look like:

class User {
Collection<Role> roles;
// Extra user data.
}

class Role {
Collection<Module> accessableModules;
Collection<User> users;
// Extra role data
}

class Module {
// module data
}

So, this would be
User many-to-many Role
Role one-to-many Module

Hope this helps,
Daniel.

Reply to this Message

Harry - 29 Jan 2007 02:07 GMT

Thanks for that in advance
Perhaps it's my problem on not giving a good example.

What I mean is really when tertiary relationship exists ( I think you
should know tertiary does exist in ERD)
I try to use another example.
Person-Order-LineItem relationship

-----------------
| Line Item |
-----------------
|
-------------- | -----------

| Person | ------- ( ) ------ | Order |

-------------- -----------

In this case, Line Item instances appear when a relationship between
the Person and Order forms.
Hope my example does a good illustration.

Thanks for your help.
Harry

On Jan 29, 9:41 am, "Daniel Pitts" <googlegrou...@coloraura.com>
wrote:

> > Hi All,
>
[quoted text clipped - 30 lines]
> Hope this helps,
> Daniel.

Reply to this Message

Danno - 29 Jan 2007 04:13 GMT

> Thanks for that in advance
> Perhaps it's my problem on not giving a good example.
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> | Person | ------- ( ) ------ | Order |
> -------------- -----------

A Person Order Line Item Relationship would look like this...

Person (1)------------(∞) Order (1)--------------(∞) LineItem

There would be no need for a "tertiary" relationship.

Reply to this Message

Danno - 29 Jan 2007 04:15 GMT

On Jan 28, 6:41 pm, "Daniel Pitts" <googlegrou...@coloraura.com>
wrote:

> > Hi All,
>
[quoted text clipped - 30 lines]
> Hope this helps,
> Daniel.

I agree, I would have Module have access to roles, and roles not have
access to modules. But that's the same design I was thinking.

Reply to this Message

Harry - 29 Jan 2007 06:59 GMT

So, what you mean is to convert every tertiary relationship to two
relationships each in between two of the three entities?
Is it really possible to convert all kinds of relationships like this?

Thanks
Harry

> On Jan 28, 6:41 pm, "Daniel Pitts" <googlegrou...@coloraura.com>
> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 34 lines]
> > Daniel.I agree, I would have Module have access to roles, and roles not have
> access to modules. But that's the same design I was thinking.

Reply to this Message

Danno - 29 Jan 2007 15:32 GMT

Well, I wouldn't treat anything anyone says as religious doctrine.
So, to say, "convert ALL kinds of relationships like this" won't help
you out either. You have to model your ERD and object mappings based
on reality. You will find that this idea of tertiary relationship
where you have a prop table with 3 keys and nothing else will less
likely exist.

> So, what you mean is to convert every tertiary relationship to two
> relationships each in between two of the three entities?
[quoted text clipped - 41 lines]
> > > Daniel.I agree, I would have Module have access to roles, and roles not have
> > access to modules. But that's the same design I was thinking.

Reply to this Message

Java Persistence with Tertiary Relationship

Free Magazines