> Is it necessary to open a connection to the DB to get the metdata in order > to detect the adapter? Couldn't you just look at the jdbc url scheme?
Yes. All we have available to Cayenne is a DataSource, which doesn't have access to the driver, and can encapsulate various kinds of connection pools, which prevents any reliable assertions. > For migrations I'd like to allow for DB specific sql to be put in separate > files and then choose the correct file based on which DB is actually being > used. I was looking at the Adapter classname for this, but if AutoAdapter > is used I can't tell what which DB it is. So would the jdbc url be a > reliable source for this info? > Relatedly, what if AutoAdapter replaced itself with the actual adapter > after it was detected? Wouldn't that be better that delegating? If possible, I'd like to avoid breaking the decorator. This goes against intentional encapsulation of the details. So can your own code rely on DB metadata, just like various DbAdapterDetectors do? A very rich DB information is readily available and does not require breaking encapsulation. E.g.: String jdbcUrl = dataSource.getConnection().getMetadata().getURL(); String dbLabel = dataSource.getConnection().getMetadata().getDatabaseProductName(); You said multiple times that you don't want to open a DB connection. But why? It should solve all your problems without resorting to "instanceof" and such. Andrus On Dec 22, 2012, at 12:45 AM, John Huss <[email protected]> wrote: > Is it necessary to open a connection to the DB to get the metdata in order > to detect the adapter? Couldn't you just look at the jdbc url scheme? > > For migrations I'd like to allow for DB specific sql to be put in separate > files and then choose the correct file based on which DB is actually being > used. I was looking at the Adapter classname for this, but if AutoAdapter > is used I can't tell what which DB it is. So would the jdbc url be a > reliable source for this info? > > Relatedly, what if AutoAdapter replaced itself with the actual adapter > after it was detected? Wouldn't that be better that delegating? > > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Andrus Adamchik > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> On Dec 16, 2012, at 1:48 AM, John Huss <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> My problem with AutoAdapter is that is causes a connection to be opened >>>>> immediately whereas a hard coded adapter does not. Does it have to do >>>>> that? >>>> >>>> It shouldn't. Could you provide a stack trace of the call that starts >> the >>>> connection? Maybe there's something preceding AutoAdapter >> initialization, >>>> like connection pool creation? >>> >>> >>> Ok, deeper down I was calling >>> dataNode.getAdapter().getExtendedTypes().registerType(...) >>> which was forcing the adapter to be loaded. This appears not to happen >> if >>> I use the DI binding instead. So problem solved! >> >> Cool. Yeah, a notion of ownership of certain objects by certain other >> objects (adapter owns ExtendedType, adapter owns PkGenerator, etc) is being >> obsoleted by DI, but is still reflected in the API. We'll be gradually >> cleaning this up. >> >> Andrus >> >>
