Hi I have a table in DynamoDb like this:
{
"partitionKey": ...
"sortKey": ...
"fieldOne": ...
"fieldTwo": ...
"fieldThree": ...
}
I added a global secondary index in my CDK like this:
private createTable(): Table {
const fieldOneGsi: GlobalSecondaryIndexProps = {
indexName: 'fieldOneGsi',
partitionKey:{
name: 'partitionKey',
type: AttributeType.STRING
},
sortKey: {
name: 'fieldOne',
type: AttributeType.STRING
},
projectionType: ProjectionType.INCLUDE,
nonKeyAttributes: ['fieldTwo']
}
table.addGlobalSecondaryIndex(fieldOneGsi);
}
Since my GSI will only return 3 attributes: partition_key, fieldOne and fieldTwo. Can I only map the table schema for these attributes for querying using DynamoDbEnhancedClient? For example, something like in Java:
#DynamoDbBean
public class MyTable {
private String partitionKey;
private String fieldOne;
private String fieldTwo;
#DynamoDbPartitionKey
#DynamoDbSecondaryPartitionKey(indexNames = {"fieldOneGsi"})
#DynamoDbAttribute("partition_key")
public String getPartitionKey(){
return partitionKey;
}
#DynamoDbSecondarySortKey(indexNames = {"fieldOneGsi"})
#DynamoDbAttribute("fieldOne")
public String getFieldOne(){
return fieldOne;
}
#DynamoDbAttribute("fieldTwo")
public String getFieldTwo(){
return fieldTwo;
}
}
This should work with no issue, however you're forgetting one aspect, DynamoDB always propagates the base table keys, no matter what you choose to project. For that reason, be sure to have getters/setters for your base table keys also.
Related
Please note: although this question mentions AWS SAM, it is 100% a DynamoDB JavaScript SDK question at heart and can be answered by anyone with experience writing JavaScript Lambdas (or any client-side apps) against DynamoDB using the AWS DynamoDB client/SDK.
So I used AWS SAM to provision a new DynamoDB table with the following attributes:
FeedbackDynamoDB:
Type: AWS::DynamoDB::Table
Properties:
TableName: commentary
AttributeDefinitions:
- AttributeName: id
AttributeType: S
KeySchema:
- AttributeName: id
KeyType: HASH
ProvisionedThroughput:
ReadCapacityUnits: 5
WriteCapacityUnits: 5
StreamSpecification:
StreamViewType: NEW_IMAGE
This configuration successfully creates a DynamoDB table called commentary. However, when I view this table in the DynamoDB web console, I noticed a few things:
it has a partition key of id (type S)
it has no sort key
it has no (0) indexes
it has a read/write capacity mode of "5"
I'm not sure if this raises any red flags with anyone but I figured I would include those details, in case I've configured anything incorrectly.
Now then, I have a JavaScript (TypeScript) Lambda that instantiates a DynamoDB client (using the JavaScript SDK) and attempts to add a record/item to this table:
// this code is in a file named app.ts:
import { APIGatewayProxyEvent, APIGatewayProxyResult } from 'aws-lambda';
import { User, allUsers } from './users';
import { Commentary } from './commentary';
import { PutItemCommand } from "#aws-sdk/client-dynamodb";
import { DynamoDBClient } from "#aws-sdk/client-dynamodb";
export const lambdaHandler = async (event: APIGatewayProxyEvent): Promise<APIGatewayProxyResult> => {
try {
const ddbClient = new DynamoDBClient({ region: "us-east-1" });
let status: number = 200;
let responseBody: string = "\"message\": \"hello world\"";
const { id, content, createdAt, providerId, receiverId } = JSON.parse(event.body);
const commentary = new Commentary(id, content, createdAt, providerId, receiverId);
console.log("deserialized this into commentary");
console.log("and the deserialized commentary has content of: " + commentary.getContent());
await provideCommentary(ddbClient, commentary);
responseBody = "\"message\": \"received commentary -- check dynamoDb!\"";
return {
statusCode: status,
body: responseBody
};
} catch (err) {
console.log(err);
return {
statusCode: 500,
body: JSON.stringify({
message: err.stack,
}),
};
}
};
const provideCommentary = async (ddbClient: DynamoDBClient, commentary: Commentary) => {
const params = {
TableName: "commentary",
Item: {
id: {
S: commentary.getId()
},
content: {
S: commentary.getContent()
},
createdAt: {
S: commentary.getCreatedAt()
},
providerId: {
N: commentary.getProviderId()
},
receiverId: {
N: commentary.getReceiverId()
}
}
};
console.log("about to try to insert commentary into dynamo...");
try {
console.log("wait for it...")
const rc = await ddbClient.send(new PutItemCommand(params));
console.log("DDB response:", rc);
} catch (err) {
console.log("hmmm something awry. something....in the mist");
console.log("Error", err.stack);
throw err;
}
};
Where commentary.ts is:
class Commentary {
private id: string;
private content: string;
private createdAt: Date;
private providerId: number;
private receiverId: number;
constructor(id: string, content: string, createdAt: Date, providerId: number, receiverId: number) {
this.id = id;
this.content = content;
this.createdAt = createdAt;
this.providerId = providerId;
this.receiverId = receiverId;
}
public getId(): string {
return this.id;
}
public getContent(): string {
return this.content;
}
public getCreatedAt(): Date {
return this.createdAt;
}
public getProviderId(): number {
return this.providerId;
}
public getReceiverId(): number {
return this.receiverId;
}
}
export { Commentary };
When I update the Lambda with this handler code, and hit the Lambda with the following curl (the Lambda is invoked by an API Gateway URL that I can hit via curl/http):
curl -i --request POST 'https://<my-api-gateway>.execute-api.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/Stage/feedback' \
--header 'Content-Type: application/json' -d '{"id":"123","content":"test feedback","createdAt":"2022-12-02T08:45:26.261-05:00","providerId":457,"receiverId":789}'
I get the following HTTP 500 response:
{"message":"SerializationException: NUMBER_VALUE cannot be converted to String\n
Am I passing it a bad request body (in the curl) or do I need to tweak something in app.ts and/or commentary.ts?
Interestingly the DynamoDB API expects numerical fields of items as strings. For example:
"N": "123.45"
The doc says;
Numbers are sent across the network to DynamoDB as strings, to maximize compatibility across languages and libraries. However, DynamoDB treats them as number type attributes for mathematical operations.
Have you tried sending your input with the numerical parameters as strings as shown below? (See providerId and receiverId)
{
"id":"123",
"content":"test feedback",
"createdAt":"2022-12-02T08:45:26.261-05:00",
"providerId":"457",
"receiverId":"789"
}
You can convert these IDs into string when you're populating your input Item:
providerId: {
N: String(commentary.getProviderId())
},
receiverId: {
N: String(commentary.getReceiverId())
}
You could also use .toString() but then you'd get errors if the field is not set (null or undefined).
Try using a promise to see the outcome:
client.send(command).then(
(data) => {
// process data.
},
(error) => {
// error handling.
}
);
Everything seems alright with your table setup, I believe it's Lambda async issue with the JS sdk. I'm guessing Lambda is not waiting on your code and exiting early. Can you include your full lambda code.
I have a DynamoDB table that I need to read/write to. I am trying to create a model for reading and writing from DynamoDB with Kotlin. But I keep encountering com.amazonaws.services.dynamodbv2.datamodeling.DynamoDBMappingException: MyModelDB[myMap]; could not unconvert attribute when I run dynamoDBMapper.scanPage(...). Some times myMap will be MyListOfMaps instead, but I guess it's from iterating the keys of a Map.
My code is below:
#DynamoDBTable(tableName = "") // Non-issue, I am assigning the table name in the DynamoDBMapper
data class MyModelDB(
#DynamoDBHashKey(attributeName = "id")
var id: String,
#DynamoDBAttribute(attributeName = "myMap")
var myMap: MyMap,
#DynamoDBAttribute(attributeName = "MyListOfMapItems")
var myListOfMapItems: List<MyMapItem>,
) {
constructor() : this(id = "", myMap = MyMap(), myListOfMaps = mutableListOf())
#DynamoDBDocument
class MyMap {
#get:DynamoDBAttribute(attributeName = "myMapAttr")
var myMapAttr: MyMapAttr = MyMapAttr()
#DynamoDBDocument
class MyMapAttr {
#get:DynamoDBAttribute(attributeName = "stringValue")
var stringValue: String = ""
}
}
#DynamoDBDocument
class MyMapItem {
#get:DynamoDBAttribute(attributeName = "myMapItemAttr")
var myMapItemAttr: String = ""
}
}
I am using the com.amazonaws:aws-java-sdk-dynamodb:1.11.500 package and my dynamoDBMapper is initialised with DynamoDBMapperConfig.Builder().build() (along with some other configurations).
My question is what am I doing wrong and why? I have also seen that some Java implementations use DynamoDBTypeConverter. Is it better and I should be using that instead?
Any examples would be appreciated!
A couple comments here. First, you are not using the AWS SDK for Kotlin. You are using another SDK and simply writing Kotlin code. Using this SDK, you are not getting full benefits of Kotlin such as support of Coroutines.
The AWS SDK for Kotlin (which does offer full support of Kotlin features) was just released as DEV Preview this week. See the DEV Guide:
Setting up the AWS SDK for Kotlin
However this SDK does not support this mapping as of now. To place items into an Amazon DynamoDB table using the AWS SDK for Kotlin, you need to use:
mutableMapOf<String, AttributeValue>
Full example here.
To map Java Objects to a DynamoDB table, you should look at using the DynamoDbEnhancedClient that is part of AWS SDK for Java V2. See this topic in the AWS SDK for Java V2 Developer Guide:
Mapping items in DynamoDB tables
You can find other example of using the Enhanced Client in the AWS Github repo.
Ok, I eventually got this working thanks to some help. I edited the question slightly after getting a better understanding. Here is how my data class eventually turned out. For Java users, Kotlin compiles to Java, so if you can figure out how the conversion works, the idea should be the same for your use too.
data class MyModelDB(
#DynamoDBHashKey(attributeName = "id")
var id: String = "",
#DynamoDBAttribute(attributeName = "myMap")
#DynamoDBTypeConverted(converter = MapConverter::class)
var myMap: Map<String, AttributeValue> = mutableMapOf(),
#DynamoDBAttribute(attributeName = "myList")
#DynamoDBTypeConverted(converter = ListConverter::class)
var myList: List<AttributeItem> = mutableListOf(),
) {
constructor() : this(id = "", myMap = MyMap(), myList = mutableListOf())
}
class MapConverter : DynamoDBTypeConverter<AttributeValue, Map<String,AttributeValue>> {
override fun convert(map: Map<String,AttributeValue>>): AttributeValue {
return AttributeValue().withM(map)
}
override fun unconvert(itemMap: AttributeValue?): Map<String,AttributeValue>>? {
return itemMap?.m
}
}
class ListConverter : DynamoDBTypeConverter<AttributeValue, List<AttributeValue>> {
override fun convert(list: List<AttributeValue>): AttributeValue {
return AttributeValue().withL(list)
}
override fun unconvert(itemList: AttributeValue?): List<AttributeValue>? {
return itemList?.l
}
}
This would at least let me use my custom converters to get my data out of DynamoDB. I would go on to define a separate data container class for use within my own application, and I created a method to serialize and unserialize between these 2 data objects. This is more of a preference for how you would like to handle the data, but this is it for me.
// For reading and writing to DynamoDB
class MyModelDB {
...
fun toMyModel(): MyModel {
...
}
}
// For use in my application
class MyModel {
var id: String = ""
var myMap: CustomObject = CustomObject()
var myList<CustomObject2> = mutableListOf()
fun toMyModelDB():MyModelDB {
...
}
}
Finally, we come to the implementation of the 2 toMyModel.*() methods. Let's start with input, this is what my columns looked like:
myMap:
{
"key1": {
"M": {
"subKey1": {
"S": "some"
},
"subKey2": {
"S": "string"
}
}
},
"key2": {
"M": {
"subKey1": {
"S": "other"
},
"subKey2": {
"S": "string"
}
}
}
}
myList:
[
{
"M": {
"key1": {
"S": "some"
},
"key2": {
"S": "string"
}
}
},
{
"M": {
"key1": {
"S": "some string"
},
"key3": {
"M": {
"key4": {
"S": "some string"
}
}
}
}
}
]
The trick then is to use com.amazonaws.services.dynamodbv2.model.AttributeValue to convert each field in the JSON. So if I wanted to access the value of subKey2 in key1 field of myMap, I would do something like this:
myModelDB.myMap["key1"]
?.m // Null check and get the value of key1, a map
?.get("subKey2") // Get the AttributeValue associated with the "subKey2" key
?.s // Get the value of "subKey2" as a String
The same applies to myList:
myModelDB.myList.foreach {
it?.m // Null check and get the map at the current index
?.get("key1") // Get the AttributeValue associated with the "key1"
...
}
Edit: Doubt this will be much of an issue, but I also updated my DynamoDB dependency to com.amazonaws:aws-java-sdk-dynamodb:1.12.126
I have table in AWS mobile hub and I am using the following model for it
public class UserstopcoreDO {
private String _userId;
private String _usertoplevel;
private String _usertopscore;
private String _username;
#DynamoDBHashKey(attributeName = "userId")
#DynamoDBAttribute(attributeName = "userId")
public String getUserId() {
return _userId;
}
public void setUserId(final String _userId) {
this._userId = _userId;
}
#DynamoDBAttribute(attributeName = "usertoplevel")
public String getUsertoplevel() {
return _usertoplevel;
}
#DynamoDBAttribute(attributeName = "username")
public String getUsername() {
return _username;
}
public void setUsername(final String _username) {
this._username = _username;
}
public void setUsertoplevel(final String _usertoplevel) {
this._usertoplevel = _usertoplevel;
}
#DynamoDBIndexHashKey(attributeName = "usertopscore", globalSecondaryIndexName = "usertopscore")
public String getUsertopscore() {
return _usertopscore;
}
public void setUsertopscore(final String _usertopscore) {
this._usertopscore = _usertopscore;
}
}
In the table, I have 1500+ records and now I want to fetch Top 10 records from it so for that I write the below query
final DynamoDBQueryExpression<UserstopcoreDO> queryExpression = new DynamoDBQueryExpression<>();
queryExpression.withLimit(10);
queryExpression.setScanIndexForward(false);
final PaginatedQueryList<UserstopcoreDO> results = mapper.query(UserstopcoreDO.class, queryExpression);
Iterator<UserstopcoreDO> resultsIterator = results.iterator();
if (resultsIterator.hasNext()) {
final UserstopcoreDO item = resultsIterator.next();
try {
Log.d("Item :",item.getUsertopscore());
} catch (final AmazonClientException ex) {
Log.e(LOG_TAG, "Failed deleting item : " + ex.getMessage(), ex);
}
}
But when I run the code it gives me an error
Caused by: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Illegal query expression: No hash key condition is found in the query
but in my condition, I did not need any condition because I want to fetch top 10 records instead of one specific record. So how to handle that condition ?
If you want to "query" DynamoDB without specifying all HashKeys, use a Scan instead, i.e. DynamoDBScanExpression. You probably also want to change your "usertopscore" to be a RangeKey instead of a HashKey.
From https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSJavaSDK/latest/javadoc/com/amazonaws/services/dynamodbv2/datamodeling/DynamoDBQueryExpression.html every DynamoDBQueryExpression requires all the Hash Keys be set.
Also see boto dynamodb2: Can I query a table using range key only?
Please set the hash key in the query expression. Below is the example of query expression for main table and GSI (need to set the index name).
Querying the main table:-
Set the hash key value of the table.
UserstopcoreDO hashKeyObject = new UserstopcoreDO();
hashKeyObject.setUserId("1");
DynamoDBQueryExpression<UserstopcoreDO> queryExpressionForMainTable = new DynamoDBQueryExpression<UserstopcoreDO>()
.withHashKeyValues(hashKeyObject);
Querying the Index:-
Set the index name and hash key value of the index.
UserstopcoreDO hashIndexKeyObject = new UserstopcoreDO();
hashIndexKeyObject.setUsertoplevel("100");
DynamoDBQueryExpression<UserstopcoreDO> queryExpressionForGsi = new DynamoDBQueryExpression<UserstopcoreDO>()
.withHashKeyValues(hashIndexKeyObject).withIndexName("usertopscore");
GSI attributes in mapper:-
#DynamoDBIndexHashKey(attributeName = "usertoplevel", globalSecondaryIndexName = "usertopscore")
public String getUsertoplevel() {
return _usertoplevel;
}
#DynamoDBIndexRangeKey(attributeName = "usertopscore", globalSecondaryIndexName = "usertopscore")
public String getUsertopscore() {
return _usertopscore;
}
I'm trying to reason about the cause of a ConditionalCheckFailedException I receive when using DynamoDBMapper with a specific save expression and with UPDATE_SKIP_NULL_ATTRIBUTES SaveBehavior.
My schema is as follows:
Member.java
#Data
#DynamoDBTable(tableName = "members")
public class Member implements DDBTable {
private static final String GROUP_GSI_NAME = "group-gsi";
#DynamoDBHashKey
#DynamoDBAutoGeneratedKey
private String memberId;
#DynamoDBVersionAttribute
private Long version;
#DynamoDBIndexHashKey(globalSecondaryIndexName = GROUP_GSI_NAME)
private String groupId;
#DynamoDBAutoGeneratedTimestamp(strategy = DynamoDBAutoGenerateStrategy.CREATE)
#DynamoDBIndexRangeKey(globalSecondaryIndexName = GROUP_GSI_NAME)
private Date joinDate;
#DynamoDBAttribute
private String memberName;
#Override
#DynamoDBIgnore
public String getHashKeyColumnName() {
return "memberId";
}
#Override
#DynamoDBIgnore
public String getHashKeyColumnValue() {
return memberId;
}
}
I use the following class to create/update/get the records in the members table.
DDBModelDAO.java
public class DDBModelDAO<T extends DDBTable> {
private final Class<T> ddbTableClass;
private final AmazonDynamoDB amazonDynamoDB;
private final DynamoDBMapper dynamoDBMapper;
public DDBModelDAO(Class<T> ddbTableClass, AmazonDynamoDB amazonDynamoDB, DynamoDBMapper dynamoDBMapper) {
this.ddbTableClass = ddbTableClass;
this.amazonDynamoDB = amazonDynamoDB;
this.dynamoDBMapper = dynamoDBMapper;
}
public T loadEntry(final String hashKey) {
return dynamoDBMapper.load(ddbTableClass, hashKey);
}
public T createEntry(final T item) {
dynamoDBMapper.save(item, getSaveExpressionForCreate(item));
return item;
}
public T updateEntry(final T item) {
dynamoDBMapper.save(item, getSaveExpressionForUpdate(item),
DynamoDBMapperConfig.SaveBehavior.UPDATE_SKIP_NULL_ATTRIBUTES.config());
return item;
}
private DynamoDBSaveExpression getSaveExpressionForCreate(final T item) {
// No record with the same hash key must be present when creating
return new DynamoDBSaveExpression().withExpectedEntry(item.getHashKeyColumnName(),
new ExpectedAttributeValue(false));
}
private DynamoDBSaveExpression getSaveExpressionForUpdate(final T item) {
// The hash key for the record being updated must be present.
return new DynamoDBSaveExpression().withExpectedEntry(item.getHashKeyColumnName(),
new ExpectedAttributeValue(new AttributeValue(item.getHashKeyColumnValue()))
.withComparisonOperator(ComparisonOperator.EQ)
);
}
}
I wrote a test class to insert and update records into the members table, which is as follows:
public static void main(String[] args) {
DDBTestClient testClient = new DDBTestClient();
AmazonDynamoDB amazonDynamoDB = testClient.buildAmazonDynamoDB();
DynamoDBMapper dynamoDBMapper = testClient.buildDynamoDBMapper(amazonDynamoDB);
DDBModelDAO<Member> memberDAO = new DDBModelDAO<>(Member.class, amazonDynamoDB, dynamoDBMapper);
DDBModelDAO<Group> groupDAO = new DDBModelDAO<>(Group.class, amazonDynamoDB, dynamoDBMapper);
try {
// Create a group
Group groupToCreate = new Group();
groupToCreate.setGroupName("group-0");
Group createdGroup = groupDAO.createEntry(groupToCreate);
System.out.println("Created group: " + createdGroup);
Thread.sleep(3000);
// Create a member for the group
Member memberToCreate = new Member();
memberToCreate.setGroupId(createdGroup.getGroupId());
memberToCreate.setMemberName("member-0");
Member createdMember = memberDAO.createEntry(memberToCreate);
System.out.println("Created member: " + createdMember);
Thread.sleep(3000);
// Update member name
createdMember.setMemberName("member-updated-0");
createdMember.setGroupId(null);
//createdMember.setJoinDate(null); // <---- Causes ConditionalCheckFailedException
memberDAO.updateEntry(createdMember);
System.out.println("Updated member");
} catch (Exception exception) {
System.out.println(exception.getMessage());
}
}
As can be seen above, if I do not pass a valid value for joinDate(which happens to be the range-key for the groups GSI), in the updateEntry call, DynamoDB returns a ConditionalCheckFailedException. This is the case, even when I use a save behavior of UPDATE_SKIP_NULL_ATTRIBUTES, as can be seen in DDBModelDAO.java.
Can someone help me understand, why I'm required to send the range-key attribute for the GSI, for a conditional write to succeed?
Not sure if this answers your question:
Interface DynamoDBAutoGenerator:
"DynamoDBAutoGenerateStrategy.CREATE, instructs to generate when
creating the item. The mapper, determines an item is new, or
overwriting, if it's current value is null. There is a limitation when
performing partial updates using either,
DynamoDBMapperConfig.SaveBehavior.UPDATE_SKIP_NULL_ATTRIBUTES, or DynamoDBMapperConfig.SaveBehavior.APPEND_SET. A new value will only be generated if the mapper is also generating the key."
So the last part is important: "A new value will only be generated if the mapper is also generating the key"
That should explain why you only see the behavior that you are experiencing.
Does this make sense?
I implemented a manyToMany relationship in Symfony2/Doctrine, where the relation is an Entity itself (that was necessary because I needed to add additional columns - notice that these additional columns are not mentioned below).
There are a couple of Q&As around here that recommend to take the relationship as an entity (e.g. here, here, here or here).
I have automatically generated all getter and setter methods via doctrine:generate:entities (this explains why it is called addCompanie instead of addCompany), so I would have thought that this covers my oneToMany/ManyToOne relationship.
And creating a User and a Company work fine so far. But as soon as I try to assign a user to a company I get the following error message:
Found entity of type Acme\MyBundle\Entity\User on
association Acme\MyBundle\Entity\Company#employees,
but expecting Acme\MyBundle\Entity\CompanyHasUser
These are my Doctrine definitions (yml):
# User
Acme\MyBundle\Entity\User:
type: entity
fields:
id:
id: true
type: integer
generator:
strategy: AUTO
oneToMany:
companies:
targetEntity: Acme\MyBundle\Entity\CompanyHasUser
mappedBy: employees
# Company
Acme\MyBundle\Entity\Company:
type: entity
fields:
id:
id: true
type: integer
generator:
strategy: AUTO
oneToMany:
employees:
targetEntity: Acme\MyBundle\Entity\CompanyHasUser
mappedBy: companies
# CompanyHasUser
Acme\MyBundle\Entity\CompanyHasUser:
type: entity
fields:
id:
id: true
type: integer
generator:
strategy: AUTO
manyToOne:
companies:
targetEntity: Acme\MyBundle\Entity\Company
inversedBy: employees
joinColumns:
company_id:
referencedColumnName: id
nullable: false
employees:
targetEntity: Acme\MyBundle\Entity\User
inversedBy: companies
joinColumns:
user_id:
referencedColumnName: id
nullable: false
This is what my Entity class User look like
namespace Acme\MyBundle\Entity;
class User
{
private $id;
private $companies;
public function __construct()
{
$this->companies = new \Doctrine\Common\Collections\ArrayCollection();
}
public function addCompany(\Acme\MyBundle\Entity\CompanyHasUser $companies)
{
$this->companies[] = $companies;
return $this;
}
public function removeCompany(\Acme\MyBundle\Entity\CompanyHasUser $companies)
{
$this->companies->removeElement($companies);
}
public function getCompanies()
{
return $this->companies;
}
}
This is what my Entity class Company look like
namespace Acme\MyBundle\Entity;
class Company
{
private $id;
private $employees;
public function __construct($name, $companyAdmin)
{
$this->employees = new \Doctrine\Common\Collections\ArrayCollection();
}
public function addEmployee(\Acme\MyBundle\Entity\CompanyHasUser $employees)
{
$this->employees[] = $employees;
return $this;
}
public function removeEmployee(\Acme\MyBundle\Entity\CompanyHasUser $employees)
{
$this->employees->removeElement($employees);
}
public function getEmployees()
{
return $this->employees;
}
}
And this is what my Entity class CompanyHasUser looks like (relation between User and Company, but as far as this relation contains further columns - not mentioned in these code snippets - I had to create it as an Entity):
namespace Acme\MyBundle\Entity;
class CompanyHasUser
{
private $companies;
private $employees;
public function setCompanies(\Acme\MyBundle\Entity\Company $companies)
{
$this->companies = $companies;
return $this;
}
public function getCompanies()
{
return $this->companies;
}
public function setEmployees(\Acme\MyBundle\Entity\User $employees)
{
$this->employees = $employees;
return $this;
}
public function getEmployees()
{
return $this->employees;
}
}
My Controller logic is:
// Create new User (employee)
$user = new User();
$em = $this->getDoctrine()->getManager();
$em->persist($user);
// Create new Company (employer)
$company = new Company();
// Create relationship
$company->addEmployee($user);
$em->persist($company);
// Flush
$em->flush();
I found it out with huge thanks to Bronchas answer here. Controller logic can be implemented as follows:
// Create new User (employee)
$user = new User();
$em = $this->getDoctrine()->getManager();
$em->persist($user);
// Create new Company (employer)
$company = new Company();
$em->persist($company);
// Employ User at Company
$employment = new CompanyHasUser();
$employment->setEmployees($user);
$employment->setCompanies($company);
$em->persist($employment);
// Flush
$em->flush();