since 2 weeks, we are having this problem while trying to flush new elements:
CRITICAL: Doctrine\ORM\ORMInvalidArgumentException:
A new entity was found through the relationship 'Comment#capture' that was not configured to cascade persist operations for entity
But the capture is already in the database, and we are getting it by a findOneBy, so if we cascade persist it, or persist it, we get a
Table constraint violation: duplicate entry.
The comments are created in a loop with differents captures, with a new, and all required field are set.
With all of the entities persisted and / or got by a findOne (and all valid), the flush still fails.
I'm on this issue since a while, so please help me
I had the same problem and it was the same EntityManager. I wanted to insert an object related ManyToOne. And I don't want a cascade persist.
Example :
$category = $em->find("Category", 10);
$product = new Product();
$product->setCategory($category)
$em->persist($product);
$em->flush();
This throws the same exception for me.
So the solution is :
$category = $em->find("Category", 10);
$product = new Product();
$product->setCategory($category)
$em->merge($product);
$em->flush();
In my case a too early call of
$this->entityManager->clear();
caused the problem. It also disappeared by only doing a clear on the recent object, like
$this->entityManager->clear($capture);
My answer is relevant for topic, but not very relevant for your particular case, so for those googling I post this, as the answers above did not help me.
In my case, I had the same error with batch-processing entities that had a relation and that relation was set to the very same entity.
WHAT I DID WRONG:
When I did $this->entityManager->clear(); while processing batch of entities I would get this error, because next batch of entities would point to the detached related entity.
WHAT WENT WRONG:
I did not know that $this->entityManager->clear(); works the same as $this->entityManager->detach($entity); only detaches ALL of the repositorie`s entities.
I thought that $this->entityManager->clear(); also detaches related entities.
WHAT I SHOULD HAVE DONE:
I should have iterated over entities and detach them one by one - that would not detach the related entity that the future entities pointed to.
I hope this helps someone.
First of all, you should take better care of your code, I see like 3 differents indentations in your entity and controller - this is hard to read, and do not fit the Symfony2 coding standards.
The code you show for your controller is not complete, we have no idea from where $this->activeCapture is coming. Inside you have a $people['capture'] which contains a Capture object I presume. This is very important.
If the Capture in $people['capture'] is persisted / fetched from another EntityManager than $this->entityManager (which, again, we do not know from where it come), Doctrine2 have no idea that the object is already persisted.
You should make sure to use the same instance of the Doctrine Entity Manager for all those operations (use spl_object_hash on the EM object to make sure they are the same instance).
You can also tell the EntityManager what to do with the Capture object.
// Refreshes the persistent state of an entity from the database
$this->entityManager->refresh($captureEntity);
// Or
// Merges the state of a detached entity into the
// persistence context of this EntityManager and returns the managed copy of the entity.
$captureEntity = $this->entityManager->merge($captureEntity);
If this does not help, you should provide more code.
The error:
'Comment#capture' that was not configured to cascade persist operations for entity
The problem:
/**
* #ORM\ManyToOne(targetEntity="Capture", inversedBy="comments")
* #ORM\JoinColumn(name="capture_id", referencedColumnName="id",nullable=true)
*/
protected $capture;
dont configured the cascade persist
try with this:
/**
* #ORM\ManyToOne(targetEntity="Capture", inversedBy="comments", cascade={"persist", "remove" })
* #ORM\JoinColumn(name="capture_id", referencedColumnName="id",nullable=true)
*/
protected $capture;
Refreshing the entity in question helped my case.
/* $item->getProduct() is already set */
/* Add these 3 lines anyway */
$id = $item->getProduct()->getId();
$reference = $this->getDoctrine()->getReference(Product::class, $id);
$item->setProduct($reference);
/* Original code as follows */
$quote->getItems()->add($item);
$this->getDoctrine()->persist($quote);
$this->getDoctrine()->flush();
Despite my $item already having a Product set elsewhere, I was still getting the error.
Turns out it was set via a different instance of EntityManager.
So this is a hack of sorts, by retrieving id of the existing product, and then retrieving a reference of it, and using setProduct to "refresh" the whatever connection. I later fixed it by ensuring I have and use only a single instance of EntityManager in my codebase.
I got this error too when tried to add new entity.
A new entity was found through the relationship 'Application\Entity\User#chats'
that was not configured to cascade persist operations for entity: ###.
To solve this issue: Either explicitly call EntityManager#persist() on this unknown entity or
configure cascade persist this association in the mapping for example #ManyToOne(..,cascade={"persist"}).
My case was that I tried to save entity, that shouldn't be saved. Entity relations was filled and tried to be saved (User has Chat in Many2Many, but Chat was a temporary entity), but there were some collisions.
So If I use cascade={"persist"} I get unwanted behaviour - trash entity is saved. My solution was to remove non-saving entity out of any saving entities:
// User entity code
public function removeFromChats(Chat $c = null){
if ($c and $this->chats->contains($c)) {
$this->chats->removeElement($c);
}
}
Saving code
/* some code witch $chat entity */
$chat->addUser($user);
// saving
$user->removeFromChats($chat);
$this->getEntityManager()->persist($user);
$this->getEntityManager()->flush();
I want to tell about my case as that might be helpful to somebody.
Given two entities: AdSet and AdSetPlacemnt. AdSet has the following property:
/**
* #ORM\OneToOne(targetEntity="AdSetPlacement", mappedBy="adSet", cascade={"persist"})
*
* #JMS\Expose
*/
protected $placement;
Then error appears when I try to delete some AdSet objects in a cycle after 1st iteration
foreach($adSetIds as $adSetId) {
/** #var AdSet $adSet */
$adSet = $this->adSetRepository->findOneBy(["id" => $adSetId]);
$this->em->remove($adSet);
$this->em->flush();
}
Error
A new entity was found through the relationship 'AppBundle\Entity\AdSetPlacement#adSet' that was not configured to cascade persist operations for entity: AppBundle\Entity\AdSet#00000000117d7c930000000054c81ae1. To solve this issue: Either explicitly call EntityManager#persist() on this unknown entity or configure cascade persist this association in the mapping for example #ManyToOne(..,cascade={"persist"}). If you cannot find out which entity causes the problem implement 'AppBundle\Entity\AdSet#__toString()' to get a clue.
Solution
The solution was to add "remove" to $placement cascade options to be:
cascade={"persist","remove"}. This guarantees that Placement also becomes detached. Entity manager will "forget" about Placement object thinking of it as "removed" once AdSet is removed.
Bad alternative
When trying to figure out what's going on I've seen a couple answers or recommendations to simply use entity manager's clear method to completely clear persistence context.
foreach($adSetIds as $adSetId) {
/** #var AdSet $adSet */
$adSet = $this->adSetRepository->findOneBy(["id" => $adSetId]);
$this->em->remove($adSet);
$this->em->flush();
$this->em->clear();
}
So that code also works, the issue gets solved but it's not always what you really wanna do. Indeed it's happens quite rarely that you actually need to clear entity manager.
I have the datastore as follows,
class Data(db.Model):
project = db.StringProperty()
project_languages = db.ListProperty(str,default=[])
When user inputs a language (input_language), I want to output all the projects which contains the language user mentioned in it's language list (project_languages).
I tried to do it in the below way but got an error saying,
BadQueryError: Parse Error: Invalid WHERE Condition
db.GqlQuery("SELECT * FROM Data WHERE input_language IN project_languages")
What should be my query, if I want to get the data in the above mentioned way?
Not sure if you are using python for the job.. If so I highly recommend you use the ndb library for datastore queries. The solution is easy as Data.query(A.IN(B))
I am quite new with appEnginy and objectify. However I need to fetch a single row from db to get some value from it. I tried to fetch element by ofy().load().type(Branch.class).filter("parent_branch_id", 0).first() but the result is FirstRef(null). However though when I run following loop:
for(Branch b : ofy().load().type(Branch.class).list()) {
System.out.println(b.id +". "+b.tree_label+" - parent is " +b.parent_branch_id);
};
What do I do wrong?
[edit]
Ofcourse Branch is a database entity, if it matters parent_branch_id is of type long.
If you want a Branch as the result of your request, I think you miss a .now():
Branch branch = ofy().load().type(Branch.class).filter("parent_branch_id", 0).first().now();
It sounds like you don't have an #Index annotation on your parent_branch_id property. When you do ofy().load().type(Branch.class).list(), Objectify is effectively doing a batch get by kind (like doing Query("Branch") with the low-level API) so it doesn't need the property indexes. As soon as you add a filter(), it uses a query.
Assuming you are using Objectify 4, properties are not indexed by default. You can index all the properties in your entity by adding an #Index annotation to the class. The annotation reference provides useful info.
Example from the Objectify API reference:
LoadResult<Thing> th = ofy.load().type(Thing.class).filter("foo", foo).first();
Thing th = ofy.load().type(Thing.class).filter("foo", foo).first().now();
So you need to make sure member "foo" has an #Index and use the now() to fetch the first element. This will return a null if no element is found.
May be "parent_branch_id"in your case is a long, in which case the value must be 0L and not 0.
I found a work around to a problem I had, and I want to know if it is valid or not. It is a similar problem to: Grails Gorm : Object references an unsaved transient instance
Lets assume I have two domain Objects (names changed to protect the guilty).
public class Shelf {
String name
Set<Book> books = [] as Set
static hasMany = [books: Book]
}
and
public class Book {
String title
Shelf shelf
}
So this means that 1 Shelf contains 0 to many Books, and one Book can be on only one Shelf.
This Shelf is very large. And at some point, it contains 80,000 Books. All stored nicely in the DB. Of course, adding new Books is getting slower and slower.
This is done by:
Book book1 = new Book("Awesome Title")
existingShelf.addToBooks(book1)
existingShelf.save(flush: true) // super slow
This is slow. Mainly (I assume) because GORM has to confirm the other 80,000 records.
So I did this to try to work around the slow point.
Book book2 = new Book("Awesome Title 2")
book2.save(flush: true)
This gives me an "Object references an unsaved transient instance", which I guess makes sense - the "shelf" value is empty.
So I did something a little weird:
Book book3 = new Book("Awesome Title 3")
book3.shelf = new Shelf()
book3.shelf.id = <known/valid id here>
book2.save(flush: true)
This works. It saves. There are no referential errors. Further code that depends on this... works.
I just made a call that last minutes and reduced it down to seconds.
But that seems too easy. I'm sure I worked around Grails magic some how. And probably broke something in the process.
Advice? Explanations?
Yes, using addTo* methods can be slow. If you look at the generated SQL you'll understand why. Doing the following:
new Book(title: "GORM Performance", shelf: grailsShelf).save()
will be faster and there is technically nothing wrong with it. Just be aware of that your instance of grailsShelf.books will not contain the new book until you've refreshed the collection from the database. This is part of what the addTo* method does for you.
Side note:
Set<Book> books = [] as Set
is unnecessary.
I'm trying to retrieve a user object from a foreign key reference but each time I try to do so nothing gets returned...
My table is set up like this:
FBUserID long,
UserID uniqueidentifier
so I have my repository try to get the User when it's provided the FBUserID:
public User getUserByFBuid(long uid)
{
User fbUser = null;
IEnumerable<FBuid> fbUids = _myEntitiesDB.FBuidSet.Where(user => user.FBUserID == uid);
fbUser = fbUids.FirstOrDefault().aspnet_Users;
return fbUser;
}
I've checked that the uid (FBUserID) passed in is correct, I've check that the UserID is matched up to the FBUserID. And I've also checked to make sure that fbUids.Count() > 0...
I've returned fbUids.FirstOrDefault().FBUserID and gotten the correct FBUserID, but any time I try to return the aspnet_Users or aspnet_Users.UserName, etc... I don't get anything returned. (I'm guessing it's getting an error for some reason)
I don't have debugging set up properly so that's probably why i'm having so much troubles... but so far all the checking I've done I've been doing return this.Json(/* stuff returned form the repository */) so that I can do an alert when it gets back to the javascript.
Anyone know why I would have troubles retrieving the user object from a foreign key relationship like that?
Or do you have any suggestions as to finding out what's wrong?
For now, with Entity Framework 1, you don't get automatic delayed loading, e.g. if you want to traverse from one entity to the next, you need to either do an .Include("OtherEntity") on your select to include those entities in the query, or you need to explicitly call .Load("OtherEntity") on your EntityContext to load that entity.
This was a design decision by the EF team not to support automagic deferred loading, since they considered it to be too dangerous; they wanted to make it clear and obvious to the user that he is also including / loading a second set of entities.
Due to high popular demand, the upcoming EF v4 (to be released with .NET 4.0 sometime towards the end of 2009) will support the automatic delayed loading - if you wish to use it. You need to explicitly enable it since it's off by default:
context.ContextOptions.DeferredLoadingEnabled = true;
See some articles on that new feature:
A Look at Lazy Loading in EF4
POCO Lazy Loading
Don't know if this is what you are asking but i do a join like so;
var votes = from av in dc.ArticleVotes
join v in dc.Votes on av.voteId equals v.id
where av.articleId == articleId
select v;
Did this help or am I off base?