i have two hbm files

Group.hbm.xml

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE hibernate-mapping PUBLIC
"-//Hibernate/Hibernate Mapping DTD 3.0//EN"
"http://hibernate.sourceforge.net/hibernate-mapping-3.0.dtd">


<hibernate-mapping>
<class name="com.khushiiit.domain.Group" table="GROUP_TABLE">
<id name="id" column="GROUP_ID" unsaved-value="0">
<generator class="increment"></generator>
</id>
<property name="groupName" type="string" column="GROUP_NAME" not-null="true"></property>
<property name="mobiles" type="string" column="MOBILES"></property>

</class>
</hibernate-mapping>



User.hbm.xml
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE hibernate-mapping PUBLIC
"-//Hibernate/Hibernate Mapping DTD 3.0//EN"
"http://hibernate.sourceforge.net/hibernate-mapping-3.0.dtd">


<hibernate-mapping>
<class name="com.khushiiit.domain.User" table="USER_TABLE">

<id name="name" type="string" column = "USER_NAME"></id>
<property name="passwd" type="string" column="PASSWORD" not-null="true"> </property>
<property name="balance" type="double" column = "BALANCE"></property>
<list name="userGroups" cascade="all, delete-orphan">
<key column="user_id" />
<list-index/>
<one-to-many class="com.khushiiit.domain.Group" />
</list>
</class>

</hibernate-mapping>


I want that corresponding to each user there is no repeating group.
like A and B are user
than A and B may contain group with same name but
A can have two groups with same name ..


waiting for response ......................

could u explain this again..

>I want that corresponding to each user there is no repeating group.
>like A and B are user
>than A and B may contain group with same name but
> A can have two groups with same name ..

I am assuming that you are asking for this..

>than A and B may contain group with same name but
> A can't have two groups with same name ..

i.e Each user can have unique group names with in their contexts.

Actually I too is looking for such solution using annotations.. For now, I am checking for such constrains in my code while saving each user.

Regards,
Nagendra

Sorry for Misspelled and thanks for correcting me.

This is exactly what i want to ask.

actually i am also using constraints to bypass the situation in which one user have two similar group.


This problem can be solved in one way if we replace one to many mapping from User to many to one in Group class and use property-ref to describer group name as foreign key but i dont want to do this coz in my code a group exist because of user but not like user exist coz of group.....



looking for more solutions .....................