As a subclass of JobImpl, TimerImpl will be save to the table of JBPM_JOB ,according to the jbpm.pvm.job.hbm.xml.

However ,there is a one-to-many between TimeImpl and ExecutionImpl, so ,hibernate will know that the ExecutionImpl's timers will be associate to the EXECUTION_ field of JBPM_JOB.

If there is a many-to-many mapping, the table of <set> will be necessary, in this case ,it acts as a association of JBPM_JOB and JBPM_EXECUTION.

table="JBPM_TIMER" must be not necessary. when setting hibernate.hbm2ddl.auto=" create-drop", there no table named JBPM_TIMER be created.

So I think you maybe wrong here.

Best wishes!
----Original Message----
i think it is must be there.

regards, tom.

aximo.yang wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am look the the codes of jbpm4 alpha1 and find that there is unheeding
> > mistake in jbpm.pvm.execution.hbm.xml:
> >
> > < property name = / "hasTimers" / column = / "HASTIMERS_" / />
> >
> > < set name = / "timers" /
> >
> > cascade = / "all-delete-orphan" /
> >
> > table=/"JBPM_TIMER"/>
> >
> > < key foreign-key = / "FK_TMR_EXECUTION" / >
> >
> > < column name = / "EXECUTION_" / />
> >
> > </ key >
> >
> > < one-to-many class = / "org.jbpm.pvm.internal.job.TimerImpl" / />
> >
> > </ set >
> >
> > The table doesn't assigned ? for the Hibernate will ignore it ,so there
> > will be not mistake, but make someboby wondering.you can just delete it
> > ,is right?