Hi

I have an abstract super class that does not have a table, and two subclasses that do have tables. Is it possible to map this, or do I *have* to have a table for the abstract class (and use the same table for the subclasses)?

Is there any way to map without a table for the abstract class, and two tables for the subclasses?

Let me know if I need to explain more.

Thanks.

You can do that, this is the table-per-concrete-class strategy.

Just map the subclass as classical classes.

But I get this exception:

Exception building SessionFactory: Association references unmapped class: nz.govt.msd.inet.HR.HRExit.InterviewQuestion

because the class I am currently persisting has a member variable which is a Set whose contents are the type of the abstract base class.

eg:

Classes:

public abstract class InterviewQuestions { ... }

public class ReasonIntQues extends InterviewQuestions { ... }

public class GenericIntQues extends InterviewQuestions { ... }

public class ExitInterview {
private Set interviewQuestions;
...
}

mapping:

<class name="ExitInterview" table="Exit_Interviews">
...
<set name="interviewQuestions" lazy="true">
<key column="ID"/>
<one-to-many class="InterviewQuestion"/>
</set>
</class>

I have mappings for ReasonIntQues and GenericIntQues, because I have tables for them, but I have no mapping for InterviewQuestions, because the mapping seems to require a table (or default to one)

What am I doing wrong? Thanks.

You need to use many-to-any and any mappings if you have a reference to the unmapped abstract class. See http://www.hibernate.org/hib_docs/reference/html/inheritance.html