Can anyone spot what's wrong with this? Three tables:


<hibernate-mapping>
<class name="com.package.tableA" table="tableA" proxy="com.package.tableA" dynamic-update="false" dynamic-insert="false">
<id name="id" column="tableA_id" type="java.lang.Integer">
<generator class="assigned"></generator>
</id>
<one-to-one name="tableBLink" class="com.package.tableB" />
</class>
</hibernate-mapping>

<hibernate-mapping>
<class name="com.package.tableB" table="tableB" proxy="com.package.tableB" dynamic-update="false" dynamic-insert="false">
<id name="id" column="tableB_id" type="java.lang.Integer">
<generator class="assigned"></generator>
</id>
<one-to-one name="tableCLink" class="com.package.tableC" />
</class>
</hibernate-mapping>

<hibernate-mapping>
<class name="com.package.tableC" table="tableC" proxy="com.package.tableC" dynamic-update="false" dynamic-insert="false">
<id name="id" column="tableC_id" type="java.lang.Integer">
<generator class="assigned"></generator>
</id>
</class>
</hibernate-mapping>


and the HQL
"from tableA as A inner join fetch A.tableBLink WHERE A.tableBLink.tableCLink.id = 2"

BUT the logged SQL becomes:

select columns
.
.
.
from
tableA tableA0_ inner join tableB tableB1_ on tableA0_.id=tableB1_.id
where
(tableB1_.id=2 )


any eagle-eye hibernate techies out there who can see where the problem is coming from?

Hm... Stupid question: where is the problem?

Do you worry tableC was not joined? I suppose there is no need for this because for <one-to-one> mapping ID properties for both sides of association are equal.

Please stay fair, this is a beginner forum.

dimas answer is correct, however ;-). If you expect no to have the same id between A, B and C, use the property-ref attribute of one-to-one available in hibernate 2.1 to map your DB.

"Stupid" was about MY question of course :)

Sorry, I misread ;-)

Ahhh! That was obvious - should have read the docs more carefully. Thanks guys.