首先以父子关系为例:   
  <   
  对应生成的DDL drop table PARENT; 
  代码: 
  drop table CHILD; 
  create table PARENT (ID INTEGER not null generated by default as identity, primary key (ID)); 
  create table CHILD (ID INTEGER not null generated by default as identity, PARENTID INTEGER, primary key (ID)); 
  alter table CHILD add constraint FK3D1FCFC74B18345 foreign key (PARENTID) references PARENT;   
  *大写的部分inverse="true"表示 ParentPO 本身不维护表之间的关系!,而由想反的一方 children来维护,   
  *CASCADE=“ALL”表示 无论是update,insert ,delete 都保持几连关系   
  *lazy="true"表示初始化父亲的时候不会把所有的儿子都从数据库中load进来。   
  下面先看一下几个例子:   
  生成的SQL:   
  代码: 
  Hibernate: insert into PARENT (ID) values (default) 
  Hibernate: insert into CHILD (PARENTID, ID) values (?, default) 
  Hibernate: insert into CHILD (PARENTID, ID) values (?, default)   
  结果 C:\Myapp\SQLLIB\BIN>db2 select * from child   
  代码: 
  ID     PARENTID 
  ----------- ----------- 
       71     44 
       72     44 
       73     44 
  C:\Myapp\SQLLIB\BIN>db2 select * from parent    
  ID 
  ----------- 
       44    
  注意之只有一句:session.save(parent);就把两个儿子保存进了数据库。   
  *首先讲讲inverse=true作用: 这里关系是由儿子维护的,所以如果只是往父亲里加入儿子,不给儿子设置父亲的话session.save(parent),就不会保存儿子! 看这个例子:注意与例子1的对比   
  代码: 
  *ChildPO child = new ChildPO(parent)---〉ChildPO child = new ChildPO(),   
          ITxMgr tx = null; 
          tx = HibernateTxMgr.beginTrans("Add a new relationships..."); 
          session = (Session) tx.getSession(); 
          parent = new ParentPO(); 
          ChildPO child = new ChildPO(); 
          ChildPO child2 = new ChildPO(); 
          List list = new ArrayList(); 
          list.add(child); 
          list.add(child2); 
          parent.setChildren(list); 
          session.save(parent); 
          session.flush(); 
          System.out.println("dddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd") ; 
          ChildPO child3 = new ChildPO(); 
          child3.setParent(parent); 
          session.save(child3); 
          session.flush(); 
          System.out.println("eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee") ; 
          tx.endTrans();   
  生成的SQL没有变   
  代码: 
  Hibernate: insert into PARENT (ID) values (default)    
  Hibernate: insert into CHILD (PARENTID, ID) values (?, default)    
  Hibernate: insert into CHILD (PARENTID, ID) values (?, default)    
  dddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd 
  Hibernate: insert into CHILD (PARENTID, ID) values (?, default) 
  eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee   
  *注意父子关系丢失了 C:\Myapp\SQLLIB\BIN>db2 select * from child   
  代码: 
  ID     PARENTID 
  ----------- ----------- 
       74      - 
       75      - 
       76     45 
  C:\Myapp\SQLLIB\BIN>db2 select * from parent    
  ID 
  ----------- 
       45   
  *为什么最后一个孩子的父亲没有丢失呢? 就在于child3.setParent(parent);,所以关系是由孩子维护的,如果child不setParent,或者 new childPO(父亲)的话 父子关系就丢失了,parent.setChildren(list);是没有用的! 
  *这里就又引入了另外一个问题为什么要用inverse? 用了它维护关系起岂不是很麻烦?,这里给出个例子给大家一个解释:(关键原因在于性能)   
  下面这个例子和例子一完全一样,所差的就是没有用inverse=true   
  例子2:   
  代码: 
  hibernate-mapping> 
    <class name="com.etech.bm.po.ChildPO" table="CHILD"> 
          <id name="id" column="ID" type="integer"> 
              <generator class="identity"/> 
          </id> 
      <many-to-one name="parent" class="com.etech.bm.po.ParentPO" column="PARENTID"/> 
    </class> 
    <class name="com.etech.bm.po.ParentPO" table="PARENT"> 
          <id name="id" column="ID" type="integer"> 
              <generator class="identity"/> 
          </id> 
      <bag name="children" CASCADE=“ALL”> 
          <key column="PARENTID"/> 
          <one-to-many class="com.etech.bm.po.ChildPO"/> 
      </bag> 
    </class>    
  </hibernate-mapping>   
  代码: 
  drop table PARENT; 
  drop table CHILD; 
  create table PARENT (ID INTEGER not null generated by default as identity, primary key (ID)); 
  create table CHILD (ID INTEGER not null generated by default as identity, PARENTID INTEGER, primary key (ID)); 
  alter table CHILD add constraint FK3D1FCFC74B18345 foreign key (PARENTID) references PARENT;   
  代码: 
  ITxMgr tx = null; 
          tx = HibernateTxMgr.beginTrans("Add a new relationships..."); 
          session = (Session) tx.getSession(); 
          parent = new ParentPO(); 
          ChildPO child = new ChildPO(parent); 
          ChildPO child2 = new ChildPO(parent); 
          List list = new ArrayList(); 
          list.add(child); 
          list.add(child2); 
          parent.setChildren(list); 
          session.save(parent); 
          session.flush(); 
          System.out.println("dddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd") ; 
          ChildPO child3 = new ChildPO(); 
          child3.setParent(parent); 
          session.save(child3); 
          session.flush(); 
          System.out.println("eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee") ; 
          tx.endTrans();    
  hibernate 生成的sql Hibernate: insert into PARENT (ID) values (default)   
  代码: 
  Hibernate: insert into CHILD (PARENTID, ID) values (?, default)    
  Hibernate: insert into CHILD (PARENTID, ID) values (?, default)    
  Hibernate: update CHILD set PARENTID=? where ID=? 
  dddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd 
  Hibernate: insert into CHILD (PARENTID, ID) values (?, default) 
  Hibernate: values IDENTITY_VAL_LOCAL()   
  结果 C:\Myapp\SQLLIB\BIN>db2 select * from parent   
  代码: 
  ID 
  ----------- 
       46 
  ID     PARENTID 
  ----------- ----------- 
       77     46 
       78     46 
       79     46   
  明显比原来多了一句Hibernate: update CHILD set PARENTID=? where ID=?针对每一个孩子都去更新父亲的id明显速度很慢,因为父亲有个孩子的集合,他无法知道哪个孩子的父亲id已经指向自己了,所以对于每一个孩子,都要更新父亲使他只想自己,而这个关系由孩子维护就好多了,每个孩子只有一个父亲,只有设置过的才需要更新,所以显然,这个父子关系由孩子来维护比较省力.减轻了数据库的负担   
  *现在我们再来看看在没有 inverse=true 的条件下 ChildPO child = new ChildPO(parent)---〉ChildPO child = new ChildPO(),     
  代码: 
  ITxMgr tx = null; 
          tx = HibernateTxMgr.beginTrans("Add a new relationships..."); 
          session = (Session) tx.getS 
查看本文来源