Skip to content

Fix mapping comments regarding instance to definition relation #4249

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
im-pratham wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Fix mapping comments regarding instance to definition relation #4249

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 3 additions & 3 deletions ...wable-cmmn-engine/src/main/resources/org/flowable/cmmn/db/mapping/entity/CaseInstance.xml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -316,7 +316,7 @@
CASE_DEF.VERSION_ as CaseDefinitionVersion,
CASE_DEF.DEPLOYMENT_ID_ as CaseDefinitionDeploymentId
from ${prefix}ACT_CMMN_RU_CASE_INST RES
<!-- Doing an inner join on the definition table is OK, since it is a 1:1 relationship -->
<!-- Doing an inner join on the definition table is OK. It is an N:1 relationship -->
inner join ${prefix}ACT_CMMN_CASEDEF CASE_DEF on RES.CASE_DEF_ID_ = CASE_DEF.ID_
<include refid="commonSelectCaseInstancesByQueryCriteriaSql" />
${orderBy}
Expand All @@ -325,7 +325,7 @@

<select id="selectCaseInstanceCountByQueryCriteria" parameterType="org.flowable.cmmn.engine.impl.runtime.CaseInstanceQueryImpl" resultType="long">
select count(distinct RES.ID_) from ${prefix}ACT_CMMN_RU_CASE_INST RES
<!-- Doing an inner join on the definition table is OK, since it is a 1:1 relationship -->
<!-- Doing an inner join on the definition table is OK. It is an N:1 relationship -->
inner join ${prefix}ACT_CMMN_CASEDEF CASE_DEF on RES.CASE_DEF_ID_ = CASE_DEF.ID_
<include refid="commonSelectCaseInstancesByQueryCriteriaSql" />
</select>
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -369,7 +369,7 @@

<sql id="selectCaseInstancesWithVariablesByQueryCriteriaSql">
from ${prefix}ACT_CMMN_RU_CASE_INST RES
<!-- Doing an inner join on the definition table is OK, since it is a 1:1 relationship -->
<!-- Doing an inner join on the definition table is OK. It is an N:1 relationship -->
inner join ${prefix}ACT_CMMN_CASEDEF CASE_DEF on RES.CASE_DEF_ID_ = CASE_DEF.ID_
<include refid="commonSelectCaseInstancesByQueryCriteriaSql"/>
</sql>
Expand Down
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions ...mn-engine/src/main/resources/org/flowable/cmmn/db/mapping/entity/HistoricCaseInstance.xml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -338,7 +338,7 @@
<sql id="selectHistoricCaseInstancesWithVariablesByQueryCriteriaSql">
from ${prefix}ACT_CMMN_HI_CASE_INST RES
<!--
Doing a join on the definition table is OK, since it is a 1:1 relationship.
Doing a join on the definition table is OK, since it is an N:1 relationship.
This has to be an outer join because historic data might exists, but definitions might have been deleted
-->
left outer join ${prefix}ACT_CMMN_CASEDEF CASE_DEF on RES.CASE_DEF_ID_ = CASE_DEF.ID_
Expand All @@ -348,7 +348,7 @@
<sql id="selectHistoricCaseInstancesByQueryCriteriaSql">
from ${prefix}ACT_CMMN_HI_CASE_INST RES
<!--
Doing a join on the definition table is OK, since it is a 1:1 relationship.
Doing a join on the definition table is OK, since it is an N:1 relationship.
This has to be an outer join because historic data might exists, but definitions might have been deleted
-->
left outer join ${prefix}ACT_CMMN_CASEDEF CASE_DEF on RES.CASE_DEF_ID_ = CASE_DEF.ID_
Expand Down
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions modules/flowable-engine/src/main/resources/org/flowable/db/mapping/entity/Execution.xml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -655,7 +655,7 @@

<sql id="selectExecutionsByQueryCriteriaSql">
from ${prefix}ACT_RU_EXECUTION RES
<!-- Doing an inner join on the definition table is OK, since it is a 1:1 relationship -->
<!-- Doing an inner join on the definition table is OK. It is an N:1 relationship -->
inner join ${prefix}ACT_RE_PROCDEF P on RES.PROC_DEF_ID_ = P.ID_
<include refid="commonSelectExecutionsByQueryCriteriaSql"/>
</sql>
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -693,7 +693,7 @@

<sql id="selectProcessInstanceWithVariablesByQueryCriteriaSql">
from ${prefix}ACT_RU_EXECUTION RES
<!-- Doing an inner join on the definition table is OK, since it is a 1:1 relationship -->
<!-- Doing an inner join on the definition table is OK. It is an N:1 relationship -->
inner join ${prefix}ACT_RE_PROCDEF P on RES.PROC_DEF_ID_ = P.ID_
<include refid="commonSelectExecutionsByQueryCriteriaSql"/>
</sql>
Expand Down
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions ...able-engine/src/main/resources/org/flowable/db/mapping/entity/HistoricProcessInstance.xml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -449,7 +449,7 @@
<sql id="selectHistoricProcessInstancesByQueryCriteriaSql">
from ${prefix}ACT_HI_PROCINST RES
<!--
Doing a join on the definition table is OK, since it is a 1:1 relationship.
Doing a join on the definition table is OK, since it is an N:1 relationship.
This has to be an outer join because historic data might exists, but definitions might have been deleted
-->
left outer join ${prefix}ACT_RE_PROCDEF DEF on RES.PROC_DEF_ID_ = DEF.ID_
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -497,7 +497,7 @@
<sql id="selectHistoricProcessInstancesWithVariablesByQueryCriteriaSql">
from ${prefix}ACT_HI_PROCINST RES
<!--
Doing a join on the definition table is OK, since it is a 1:1 relationship.
Doing a join on the definition table is OK, since it is an N:1 relationship.
This has to be an outer join because historic data might exists, but definitions might have been deleted
-->
left outer join ${prefix}ACT_RE_PROCDEF DEF on RES.PROC_DEF_ID_ = DEF.ID_
Expand Down