hibernate-orm/doc/reference/en/modules/inheritance_mapping.xml

492 lines
19 KiB
XML

<chapter id="inheritance">
<title>Inheritance Mapping</title>
<sect1 id="inheritance-strategies" revision="3">
<title>The Three Strategies</title>
<para>
Hibernate supports the three basic inheritance mapping strategies:
</para>
<itemizedlist>
<listitem>
<para>
table per class hierarchy
</para>
</listitem>
<listitem>
<para>
table per subclass
</para>
</listitem>
<listitem>
<para>
table per concrete class
</para>
</listitem>
</itemizedlist>
<para>
In addition, Hibernate supports a fourth, slightly different kind of
polymorphism:
</para>
<itemizedlist>
<listitem>
<para>
implicit polymorphism
</para>
</listitem>
</itemizedlist>
<para>
It is possible to use different mapping strategies for different
branches of the same inheritance hierarchy, and then make use of implicit
polymorphism to achieve polymorphism across the whole hierarchy. However,
Hibernate does not support mixing <literal>&lt;subclass&gt;</literal>,
and <literal>&lt;joined-subclass&gt;</literal> and
<literal>&lt;union-subclass&gt;</literal> mappings under the same root
<literal>&lt;class&gt;</literal> element. It is possible to mix together
the table per hierarchy and table per subclass strategies, under the
the same <literal>&lt;class&gt;</literal> element, by combining the
<literal>&lt;subclass&gt;</literal> and <literal>&lt;join&gt;</literal>
elements (see below).
</para>
<para>
It is possible to define <literal>subclass</literal>, <literal>union-subclass</literal>,
and <literal>joined-subclass</literal> mappings in separate mapping documents, directly beneath
<literal>hibernate-mapping</literal>. This allows you to extend a class hierachy just by adding
a new mapping file. You must specify an <literal>extends</literal> attribute in the subclass mapping,
naming a previously mapped superclass. Note: Previously this feature made the ordering of the mapping
documents important. Since Hibernate3, the ordering of mapping files does not matter when using the
extends keyword. The ordering inside a single mapping file still needs to be defined as superclasses
before subclasses.
</para>
<programlisting><![CDATA[
<hibernate-mapping>
<subclass name="DomesticCat" extends="Cat" discriminator-value="D">
<property name="name" type="string"/>
</subclass>
</hibernate-mapping>]]></programlisting>
<sect2 id="inheritance-tableperclass" >
<title>Table per class hierarchy</title>
<para>
Suppose we have an interface <literal>Payment</literal>, with implementors
<literal>CreditCardPayment</literal>, <literal>CashPayment</literal>,
<literal>ChequePayment</literal>. The table per hierarchy mapping would
look like:
</para>
<programlisting><![CDATA[<class name="Payment" table="PAYMENT">
<id name="id" type="long" column="PAYMENT_ID">
<generator class="native"/>
</id>
<discriminator column="PAYMENT_TYPE" type="string"/>
<property name="amount" column="AMOUNT"/>
...
<subclass name="CreditCardPayment" discriminator-value="CREDIT">
<property name="creditCardType" column="CCTYPE"/>
...
</subclass>
<subclass name="CashPayment" discriminator-value="CASH">
...
</subclass>
<subclass name="ChequePayment" discriminator-value="CHEQUE">
...
</subclass>
</class>]]></programlisting>
<para>
Exactly one table is required. There is one big limitation of this mapping
strategy: columns declared by the subclasses, such as <literal>CCTYPE</literal>,
may not have <literal>NOT NULL</literal> constraints.
</para>
</sect2>
<sect2 id="inheritance-tablepersubclass">
<title>Table per subclass</title>
<para>
A table per subclass mapping would look like:
</para>
<programlisting><![CDATA[<class name="Payment" table="PAYMENT">
<id name="id" type="long" column="PAYMENT_ID">
<generator class="native"/>
</id>
<property name="amount" column="AMOUNT"/>
...
<joined-subclass name="CreditCardPayment" table="CREDIT_PAYMENT">
<key column="PAYMENT_ID"/>
<property name="creditCardType" column="CCTYPE"/>
...
</joined-subclass>
<joined-subclass name="CashPayment" table="CASH_PAYMENT">
<key column="PAYMENT_ID"/>
...
</joined-subclass>
<joined-subclass name="ChequePayment" table="CHEQUE_PAYMENT">
<key column="PAYMENT_ID"/>
...
</joined-subclass>
</class>]]></programlisting>
<para>
Four tables are required. The three subclass tables have primary
key associations to the superclass table (so the relational model
is actually a one-to-one association).
</para>
</sect2>
<sect2 id="inheritance-tablepersubclass-discriminator" revision="2">
<title>Table per subclass, using a discriminator</title>
<para>
Note that Hibernate's implementation of table per subclass requires
no discriminator column. Other object/relational mappers use a
different implementation of table per subclass which requires a type
discriminator column in the superclass table. The approach taken by
Hibernate is much more difficult to implement but arguably more
correct from a relational point of view. If you would like to use
a discriminator column with the table per subclass strategy, you
may combine the use of <literal>&lt;subclass&gt;</literal> and
<literal>&lt;join&gt;</literal>, as follow:
</para>
<programlisting><![CDATA[<class name="Payment" table="PAYMENT">
<id name="id" type="long" column="PAYMENT_ID">
<generator class="native"/>
</id>
<discriminator column="PAYMENT_TYPE" type="string"/>
<property name="amount" column="AMOUNT"/>
...
<subclass name="CreditCardPayment" discriminator-value="CREDIT">
<join table="CREDIT_PAYMENT">
<key column="PAYMENT_ID"/>
<property name="creditCardType" column="CCTYPE"/>
...
</join>
</subclass>
<subclass name="CashPayment" discriminator-value="CASH">
<join table="CASH_PAYMENT">
<key column="PAYMENT_ID"/>
...
</join>
</subclass>
<subclass name="ChequePayment" discriminator-value="CHEQUE">
<join table="CHEQUE_PAYMENT" fetch="select">
<key column="PAYMENT_ID"/>
...
</join>
</subclass>
</class>]]></programlisting>
<para>
The optional <literal>fetch="select"</literal> declaration tells Hibernate
not to fetch the <literal>ChequePayment</literal> subclass data using an
outer join when querying the superclass.
</para>
</sect2>
<sect2 id="inheritance-mixing-tableperclass-tablepersubclass">
<title>Mixing table per class hierarchy with table per subclass</title>
<para>
You may even mix the table per hierarchy and table per subclass strategies
using this approach:
</para>
<programlisting><![CDATA[<class name="Payment" table="PAYMENT">
<id name="id" type="long" column="PAYMENT_ID">
<generator class="native"/>
</id>
<discriminator column="PAYMENT_TYPE" type="string"/>
<property name="amount" column="AMOUNT"/>
...
<subclass name="CreditCardPayment" discriminator-value="CREDIT">
<join table="CREDIT_PAYMENT">
<property name="creditCardType" column="CCTYPE"/>
...
</join>
</subclass>
<subclass name="CashPayment" discriminator-value="CASH">
...
</subclass>
<subclass name="ChequePayment" discriminator-value="CHEQUE">
...
</subclass>
</class>]]></programlisting>
<para>
For any of these mapping strategies, a polymorphic association to the root
<literal>Payment</literal> class is mapped using
<literal>&lt;many-to-one&gt;</literal>.
</para>
<programlisting><![CDATA[<many-to-one name="payment" column="PAYMENT_ID" class="Payment"/>]]></programlisting>
</sect2>
<sect2 id="inheritance-tableperconcrete" revision="2">
<title>Table per concrete class</title>
<para>
There are two ways we could go about mapping the table per concrete class
strategy. The first is to use <literal>&lt;union-subclass&gt;</literal>.
</para>
<programlisting><![CDATA[<class name="Payment">
<id name="id" type="long" column="PAYMENT_ID">
<generator class="sequence"/>
</id>
<property name="amount" column="AMOUNT"/>
...
<union-subclass name="CreditCardPayment" table="CREDIT_PAYMENT">
<property name="creditCardType" column="CCTYPE"/>
...
</union-subclass>
<union-subclass name="CashPayment" table="CASH_PAYMENT">
...
</union-subclass>
<union-subclass name="ChequePayment" table="CHEQUE_PAYMENT">
...
</union-subclass>
</class>]]></programlisting>
<para>
Three tables are involved for the subclasses. Each table defines columns for
all properties of the class, including inherited properties.
</para>
<para>
The limitation of this approach is that if a property is mapped on the
superclass, the column name must be the same on all subclass tables.
(We might relax this in a future release of Hibernate.) The identity
generator strategy is not allowed in union subclass inheritance, indeed
the primary key seed has to be shared accross all unioned subclasses
of a hierarchy.
</para>
<para>
If your superclass is abstract, map it with <literal>abstract="true"</literal>.
Of course, if it is not abstract, an additional table (defaults to
<literal>PAYMENT</literal> in the example above) is needed to hold instances
of the superclass.
</para>
</sect2>
<sect2 id="inheritance-tableperconcreate-polymorphism">
<title>Table per concrete class, using implicit polymorphism</title>
<para>
An alternative approach is to make use of implicit polymorphism:
</para>
<programlisting><![CDATA[<class name="CreditCardPayment" table="CREDIT_PAYMENT">
<id name="id" type="long" column="CREDIT_PAYMENT_ID">
<generator class="native"/>
</id>
<property name="amount" column="CREDIT_AMOUNT"/>
...
</class>
<class name="CashPayment" table="CASH_PAYMENT">
<id name="id" type="long" column="CASH_PAYMENT_ID">
<generator class="native"/>
</id>
<property name="amount" column="CASH_AMOUNT"/>
...
</class>
<class name="ChequePayment" table="CHEQUE_PAYMENT">
<id name="id" type="long" column="CHEQUE_PAYMENT_ID">
<generator class="native"/>
</id>
<property name="amount" column="CHEQUE_AMOUNT"/>
...
</class>]]></programlisting>
<para>
Notice that nowhere do we mention the <literal>Payment</literal> interface
explicitly. Also notice that properties of <literal>Payment</literal> are
mapped in each of the subclasses. If you want to avoid duplication, consider
using XML entities
(e.g. <literal>[ &lt;!ENTITY allproperties SYSTEM "allproperties.xml"&gt; ]</literal>
in the <literal>DOCTYPE</literal> declartion and
<literal>&amp;allproperties;</literal> in the mapping).
</para>
<para>
The disadvantage of this approach is that Hibernate does not generate SQL
<literal>UNION</literal>s when performing polymorphic queries.
</para>
<para>
For this mapping strategy, a polymorphic association to <literal>Payment</literal>
is usually mapped using <literal>&lt;any&gt;</literal>.
</para>
<programlisting><![CDATA[<any name="payment" meta-type="string" id-type="long">
<meta-value value="CREDIT" class="CreditCardPayment"/>
<meta-value value="CASH" class="CashPayment"/>
<meta-value value="CHEQUE" class="ChequePayment"/>
<column name="PAYMENT_CLASS"/>
<column name="PAYMENT_ID"/>
</any>]]></programlisting>
</sect2>
<sect2 id="inheritace-mixingpolymorphism">
<title>Mixing implicit polymorphism with other inheritance mappings</title>
<para>
There is one further thing to notice about this mapping. Since the subclasses
are each mapped in their own <literal>&lt;class&gt;</literal> element (and since
<literal>Payment</literal> is just an interface), each of the subclasses could
easily be part of another inheritance hierarchy! (And you can still use polymorphic
queries against the <literal>Payment</literal> interface.)
</para>
<programlisting><![CDATA[<class name="CreditCardPayment" table="CREDIT_PAYMENT">
<id name="id" type="long" column="CREDIT_PAYMENT_ID">
<generator class="native"/>
</id>
<discriminator column="CREDIT_CARD" type="string"/>
<property name="amount" column="CREDIT_AMOUNT"/>
...
<subclass name="MasterCardPayment" discriminator-value="MDC"/>
<subclass name="VisaPayment" discriminator-value="VISA"/>
</class>
<class name="NonelectronicTransaction" table="NONELECTRONIC_TXN">
<id name="id" type="long" column="TXN_ID">
<generator class="native"/>
</id>
...
<joined-subclass name="CashPayment" table="CASH_PAYMENT">
<key column="PAYMENT_ID"/>
<property name="amount" column="CASH_AMOUNT"/>
...
</joined-subclass>
<joined-subclass name="ChequePayment" table="CHEQUE_PAYMENT">
<key column="PAYMENT_ID"/>
<property name="amount" column="CHEQUE_AMOUNT"/>
...
</joined-subclass>
</class>]]></programlisting>
<para>
Once again, we don't mention <literal>Payment</literal> explicitly. If we
execute a query against the <literal>Payment</literal> interface - for
example, <literal>from Payment</literal> - Hibernate
automatically returns instances of <literal>CreditCardPayment</literal>
(and its subclasses, since they also implement <literal>Payment</literal>),
<literal>CashPayment</literal> and <literal>ChequePayment</literal> but
not instances of <literal>NonelectronicTransaction</literal>.
</para>
</sect2>
</sect1>
<sect1 id="inheritance-limitations">
<title>Limitations</title>
<para>
There are certain limitations to the "implicit polymorphism" approach to
the table per concrete-class mapping strategy. There are somewhat less
restrictive limitations to <literal>&lt;union-subclass&gt;</literal>
mappings.
</para>
<para>
The following table shows the limitations of table per concrete-class
mappings, and of implicit polymorphism, in Hibernate.
</para>
<table frame="topbot">
<title>Features of inheritance mappings</title>
<tgroup cols='8' align='left' colsep='1' rowsep='1'>
<colspec colname='c1' colwidth="1*"/>
<colspec colname='c2' colwidth="1*"/>
<colspec colname='c3' colwidth="1*"/>
<colspec colname='c4' colwidth="1*"/>
<colspec colname='c5' colwidth="1*"/>
<colspec colname='c6' colwidth="1*"/>
<colspec colname='c7' colwidth="1*"/>
<colspec colname='c8' colwidth="1*"/>
<thead>
<row>
<entry>Inheritance strategy</entry>
<entry>Polymorphic many-to-one</entry>
<entry>Polymorphic one-to-one</entry>
<entry>Polymorphic one-to-many</entry>
<entry>Polymorphic many-to-many</entry>
<entry>Polymorphic <literal>load()/get()</literal></entry>
<entry>Polymorphic queries</entry>
<entry>Polymorphic joins</entry>
<entry>Outer join fetching</entry>
</row>
</thead>
<tbody>
<row>
<entry>table per class-hierarchy</entry>
<entry><literal>&lt;many-to-one&gt;</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>&lt;one-to-one&gt;</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>&lt;one-to-many&gt;</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>&lt;many-to-many&gt;</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>s.get(Payment.class, id)</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>from Payment p</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>from Order o join o.payment p</literal></entry>
<entry><emphasis>supported</emphasis></entry>
</row>
<row>
<entry>table per subclass</entry>
<entry><literal>&lt;many-to-one&gt;</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>&lt;one-to-one&gt;</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>&lt;one-to-many&gt;</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>&lt;many-to-many&gt;</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>s.get(Payment.class, id)</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>from Payment p</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>from Order o join o.payment p</literal></entry>
<entry><emphasis>supported</emphasis></entry>
</row>
<row>
<entry>table per concrete-class (union-subclass)</entry>
<entry><literal>&lt;many-to-one&gt;</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>&lt;one-to-one&gt;</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>&lt;one-to-many&gt;</literal> (for <literal>inverse="true"</literal> only)</entry>
<entry><literal>&lt;many-to-many&gt;</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>s.get(Payment.class, id)</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>from Payment p</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>from Order o join o.payment p</literal></entry>
<entry><emphasis>supported</emphasis></entry>
</row>
<row>
<entry>table per concrete class (implicit polymorphism)</entry>
<entry><literal>&lt;any&gt;</literal></entry>
<entry><emphasis>not supported</emphasis></entry>
<entry><emphasis>not supported</emphasis></entry>
<entry><literal>&lt;many-to-any&gt;</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>s.createCriteria(Payment.class).add( Restrictions.idEq(id) ).uniqueResult()</literal></entry>
<entry><literal>from Payment p</literal></entry>
<entry><emphasis>not supported</emphasis></entry>
<entry><emphasis>not supported</emphasis></entry>
</row>
</tbody>
</tgroup>
</table>
</sect1>
</chapter>