I have one parent class which must keep two child lists, both are of the same class.

// parent
public class CustomTable
{
private List<FieldStatement> fieldStatements;
private List<FieldStatement> gridButtonStatements;
}

CustomTable.hbm.xml:

<list name="fieldStatements" cascade="all-delete-orphan">
<key column="CUSTOMTABLEID" not-null="true"/>
<list-index column="statementIdx"/>
<one-to-many class="com.jcalc.core.page.FieldStatement"/>
</list>

<list name="gridButtonStatements" cascade="all-delete-orphan">
<key column="CUSTOMTABLEID" not-null="true"/>
<list-index column="gridButtonIdx"/>
<one-to-many class="com.jcalc.core.page.FieldStatement"/>
</list>

// child
public class FieldStatement extends Entity
{
private CustomTable customTable;
}

FieldStatement.hbm.xml:
<many-to-one name="customTable"
class="com.jcalc.core.page.CustomTable"
column="CUSTOMTABLEID"
not-null="true"
insert="false"
update="false"/>

these configuration files worked when I had just one child list. after adding the second list, I get a
Repeated column in mapping for entity: FieldStatement column: CUSTOMTABLEID
(should be mapped with insert="false" update="false")

I am sure, hibernate is able to treat such a design. But how to make it accept the .hbm?

Error message say it itself

"Repeated column in mapping for entity: FieldStatement column: CUSTOMTABLEID
(should be mapped with insert="false" update="false")"

You need to map second collection as readonly (through insert and update attributes).

CUSTOMID is already set for insert=false and update=false.

<quote>
map second collection as readonly
</quote>

why is that a solution? crippling the second list?
the second list is just as dynamic as the first. there is no difference in the way I want to use the second list from how I use the first list. you mean hibernate can not support a feature that is so natural in straight java programming using jdbc?

I am sure somebody has done this before. it's a very realistic design.

some body help out please!

I just glanced at this thread, but if it was me, I would change the one-to-many to a many-to-many and map both associations with join tables. You're using a one-to-many, which means your FieldStatement has a single foreign-key pointing back to the parent, and with two associations, it probably can't figure it out.

that would be very disappointing, if what you say is true.

seems to me, all you have to do is assign different index column names to the two lists, then there is no conflict at all between the two lists. therefore, I would think hibernate can handles this. if I just get a reply on how.

Since you are using the same column as a FK into the customTable Hibernate doesn't understand how to differentiate between the two lists.

Maybe what you have is two different subtypes in the customTable? - could manage them in the same collection?

How do you differentiate the instances loaded in the two collections you have defined now?

there is no conflict in having two lists with the exact same type.

in the database, each type will have a different list index column filled (statementIdx vs. .gridButtonIdx). I hope you know what that means. and hibernate can work out which row belongs to which list, even if both types of rows have the same FK.