How to set N - 1 (recipient) correctly?

[god_prophet]

I've a schema abc:multipleops (that stores all operations - transactions - related to a recipient) that I need to stablish a N-1 relationship with Recipients. The relationship should be visible from both sides.

documentation says, I just should not type: revCardinality

• revCardinality (optional): with value “single” populates cardinality with type 1-1 (1-N by default)

So, this is what I need to enter to abc:multipleops, so multiple operations are linked to a single recipient???

I'm crossing revCardinality="single"   meaning that I'll remove this part from the code below:

<element integrity="normal" label="Recipient" name="recipient" noDbIndex="true"
revCardinality="single" revLabel="multipleops (Link)" revLink="multipleops"
revTarget="@codinterno" target="nms:recipient" type="link">
<join xpath-dst="@codinterno" xpath-src="@codinterno"/>
</element>

How can I validate it from the interface?

[ParthaSarathy]

Hi @god_prophet ,

In abc:multipleop schema, write the below script:

<element integrity="normal" label="Recipient" name="recipient" noDbIndex="true" revLabel="multipleops (Link)" revLink="multipleops" revTarget="@codinterno" target="nms:recipient" type="link">
<join xpath-dst="@codinterno" xpath-src="@codinterno"/>
</element>

Disconnect and reconnect the console.

Open abc:multipleop schemam> structure tab, you can see it is 1 to 1 link with Recipient table and Open Recipient schema > structure tab > display advanced field > you can see 1 to Many link (Orange color icon) created between recipient to multipleop

[Sukrity_Wadhwa]

Hi @god_prophet, 

I see that you have another thread with the same content, where a solution has been provided. Can we close this thread based on the solution shared there: https://experienceleaguecommunities.adobe.com/t5/adobe-campaign-classic-questions/how-to-set-a-1-to-...?

Let us know. Thanks!

[god_prophet]

Hi, those are differente... that one was about 1-1 relationship... this one is a 1-N relationship

[Sukrity_Wadhwa]

Oh yeah, sorry my bad. Thanks for clarifying though!