<!-- 
RSS generated by JIRA (5.2.7#850-sha1:b2af0c8dc8537b36121c6a579fabbdf79fc919e5) at Sat May 25 13:16:00 UTC 2013

It is possible to restrict the fields that are returned in this document by specifying the 'field' parameter in your request.
For example, to request only the issue key and summary add field=key&field=summary to the URL of your request.
For example:
http://www.doctrine-project.org/jira/si/jira.issueviews:issue-xml/DDC-678/DDC-678.xml?field=key&field=summary
-->
<rss version="0.92" >
<channel>
    <title>Doctrine Project</title>
    <link>http://www.doctrine-project.org/jira</link>
    <description>This file is an XML representation of an issue</description>
    <language>en-us</language>    <build-info>
        <version>5.2.7</version>
        <build-number>850</build-number>
        <build-date>21-02-2013</build-date>
    </build-info>

<item>
            <title>[DDC-678] OneToMany/OneToOne + onDelete=CASCADE may corrupt UoW.</title>
                <link>http://www.doctrine-project.org/jira/browse/DDC-678</link>
                <project id="10032" key="DDC">Doctrine 2 - ORM</project>
                        <description>&lt;p&gt;OneToMany/OneToOne associations together with an onDelete=CASCADE schema generation hint on the @JoinColumn and appropriate foreign key constraints can potentially result in a corrupt UoW if the associated objects are already managed. We need to add tests for such scenarios and settle on a well-defined behavior in such cases.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
                <environment></environment>
            <key id="11606">DDC-678</key>
            <summary>OneToMany/OneToOne + onDelete=CASCADE may corrupt UoW.</summary>
                <type id="4" iconUrl="http://www.doctrine-project.org/jira/images/icons/issuetypes/improvement.png">Improvement</type>
                                <priority id="3" iconUrl="http://www.doctrine-project.org/jira/images/icons/priorities/major.png">Major</priority>
                    <status id="1" iconUrl="http://www.doctrine-project.org/jira/images/icons/statuses/open.png">Open</status>
                    <resolution id="-1">Unresolved</resolution>
                    <security id="10000">All</security>
                        <assignee username="romanb">Roman S. Borschel</assignee>
                                <reporter username="romanb">Roman S. Borschel</reporter>
                        <labels>
                    </labels>
                <created>Sat, 10 Jul 2010 07:07:01 +0000</created>
                <updated>Sun, 5 Jun 2011 15:15:44 +0000</updated>
                                                                            <due></due>
                    <votes>0</votes>
                        <watches>0</watches>
                        <comments>
                    <comment id="14646" author="beberlei" created="Sun, 31 Oct 2010 07:18:22 +0000"  >&lt;p&gt;I think to preserve the semantics the following has to happen:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&quot;on-delete&quot; =&amp;gt; &quot;cascade&quot; has to implicitly set cascade = remove. This hurts performance of course vs just using the on-delete, however it won&apos;t corrupt the UoW.&lt;/p&gt;</comment>
                    <comment id="15093" author="beberlei" created="Sun, 2 Jan 2011 05:21:14 +0000"  >&lt;p&gt;Not entirely would it hurt performance, you could check if on-delete =&amp;gt; cascade is set. If this is the case you wouldnt need to do an explicit remove using the UnitOfWorks cascade.&lt;/p&gt;</comment>
                    <comment id="15944" author="beberlei" created="Sun, 5 Jun 2011 15:15:44 +0000"  >&lt;p&gt;Changed to improvement&lt;/p&gt;</comment>
                </comments>
                    <attachments>
                </attachments>
            <subtasks>
        </subtasks>
        </item>
</channel>
</rss>