StackOverflow2013

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals

PODoes hbm2ddl.auto=update not honor different DB users, maybe?
primarykey
Id
4808244
data
AcceptedAnswerId
4808923
AnswerCount
1
ClosedDate
CommentCount
0
CommunityOwnedDate
CreationDate
2011-01-26T18:15:29.347
FavoriteCount
0
LastActivityDate
2011-01-26T19:20:43.167
LastEditDate
LastEditorUserId
0
OwnerUserId
397673
ParentId
0
PostTypeId
1
Score
0
ViewCount
301
LastEditorDisplayName
text
Body
We are encountering strange hibernate behavior with <code>hbm2ddl.auto</code> set to <code>update</code>. In our test setup, we have two database users, one containing the tables for our beta application, the other one is mainly used for development. I.e. same table names with different users. When new tables are to be created, we do so by using <code>hbm2ddl.auto=update</code>. Now suddenly the strange behavior is: the update process looks for existing tables with the wrong user and creates those not found with the right user. E.g. if the following tables exists <pre><code>USER_A.TABLE_1 USER_B.TABLE_2 </code></pre> and we update with three tables configured: <code>TABLE_1, TABLE_2, TABLE_3</code> using USER_B, we end up with <pre><code>USER_A.TABLE_1 USER_B.TABLE_2 USER_B.TABLE_3 </code></pre> <code>TABLE_1</code> is not created for <code>USER_B</code>. After renaming <code>USER_A.TABLE_1</code> to <code>USER_A.TABLE_0</code> and updating again we end up with the expected result: <pre><code>USER_A.TABLE_0 USER_B.TABLE_1 USER_B.TABLE_2 USER_B.TABLE_3 </code></pre> Does this make any sense to anyone? Is there something like an internal hibernate cache remembering like "Hey I have already created this table on this server (and I do not care about the user)". We have spent quite some testing to reassure this is not a configuration problem, reproduced this on different machines, different configurations, from ant or using the IDE, making sure USER_A's password cannot be found anywhere in the build directory etc. So we are 100% sure, the behavior is as described - but we are completely out of ideas what happens. I'd be very happy to hear your ideas about this, since this problem is nagging for some time now. Thanks a lot, Peter 
Tags
<database><hibernate><schema><persistence><hbm2ddl>
Title
Does hbm2ddl.auto=update not honor different DB users, maybe?
singulars
PostAcceptedAnswerId
1. PO
 singulars
 PostTypePostTypeId
 PTAnswer
PostParentId
1. This table or related slice is empty.
PostTypePostTypeId
1. PTQuestion
UserLastEditorUserId
1. This table or related slice is empty.
UserOwnerUserId
1. USPeterP
plurals
PostLinksPostIdRelatedPostId
1. This table or related slice is empty.
PostLinksRelatedPostIdPostId
1. This table or related slice is empty.
PostsAcceptedAnswerId
1. This table or related slice is empty.
PostsParentIdCreationDate
1. PO
 singulars
 PostTypePostTypeId
 PTAnswer
VotesPostIdCreationDate
1. This table or related slice is empty.
CommentsPostId
1. This table or related slice is empty.

Querying!

Guidance

A row detail

Detail views are divided into sections. All the information in the data section comes from columns in the selected row. The other sections display data from other, related rows.

Related data can be related in a to-one or a to-many fashion. Captions of data related in a to-many fashion link to a list view showing a filtered view of the table.

Try moving around until you find a non-empty to-many entry and click on the label to get to one. You can move back to the root by clicking on the database name in the header.