For this case you could have 2 classes, User and Account, as below.



so the Account class knows about the User class, but not vice-versa. If you define the Meta-Data for these classes as follows

<package name="mydomain">
    <class name="User" table="USER">
        <field name="id" primary-key="true">
            <column name="USER_ID"/>
        </field>
        <field name="login">
            <column name="LOGIN" length="20" jdbc-type="VARCHAR"/>
        </field>
    </class>

    <class name="Account" table="ACCOUNT">
        <field name="id" primary-key="true">
            <column name="ACCOUNT_ID"/>
        </field>
        <field name="firstName">
            <column name="FIRSTNAME" length="50" jdbc-type="VARCHAR"/>
        </field>
        <field name="secondName">
            <column name="SECONDNAME" length="50" jdbc-type="VARCHAR"/>
        </field>
        <field name="user" persistence-modifier="persistent">
            <column name="USER_ID"/>
        </field>
    </class>
</package>

This will create 2 tables in the database, one for User (with name USER), and one for Account (with name ACCOUNT and a column USER_ID), as shown below.

Things to note :-

• Account has the object reference (and so owns the relation) to User and so its table holds the foreign-key
• If you call PM.deletePersistent() on the end of a 1-1 unidirectional relation without the relation and that object is related to another object, an exception will typically be thrown (assuming the RDBMS supports foreign keys). To delete this record you should remove the other objects association first.

For this case you could have 2 classes, User and Account again, but this time as below. Here the Account class knows about the User class, and also vice-versa.

Here we create the 1-1 relationship with a single foreign-key. To do this you define the MetaData as

<package name="mydomain">
    <class name="User" table="USER">
        <field name="id" primary-key="true">
            <column name="USER_ID"/>
        </field>
        <field name="login">
            <column name="LOGIN" length="20" jdbc-type="VARCHAR"/>
        </field>
        <field name="account" persistence-modifier="persistent" mapped-by="user">
        </field>
    </class>

    <class name="Account" table="ACCOUNT">
        <field name="id" primary-key="true">
            <column name="ACCOUNT_ID"/>
        </field>
        <field name="firstName">
            <column name="FIRSTNAME" length="50" jdbc-type="VARCHAR"/>
        </field>
        <field name="secondName">
            <column name="SECONDNAME" length="50" jdbc-type="VARCHAR"/>
        </field>
        <field name="user" persistence-modifier="persistent">
            <column name="USER_ID"/>
        </field>
    </class>
</package>

The difference is that we added mapped-by to the field of User. This will create 2 tables in the database, one for User (with name USER), and one for Account (with name ACCOUNT including a USER_ID). The fact that we specified the mapped-by on the User class means that the foreign-key is created in the ACCOUNT table.

Things to note :-

• The "mapped-by" is specified on User (the non-owning side) and so the foreign-key is held by the table of Account (the owner of the relation)
• When forming the relation please make sure that you set the relation at BOTH sides since JPOX would have no way of knowing which end is correct if you only set one end.

The above 2 relationship types assume that both classes in the 1-1 relation will have their own table. You can, of course, embed the elements of one class into the table of the other. This is described in Embedded PC Objects.