Looks like a good idea to me. I suppose you would keep backward compatibility?
Jacques From: "Adrian Crum" <adrian.c...@yahoo.com>
The blob field type is being used as a catch-all for multiple binary types. Right now getting an object from a blob field type could return a byte array, a deserialized Java object, or a javax.sql.rowset.serial.SerialBlob object. There is no way to know for sure what will be returned - the entity engine code tries various methods until one works. I think it would be better to specify exactly what you intend to store in a BLOB SQL type: a byte array, a serialized Java object, or some unknown binary type. So, I propose that we add two new field types: byte-array and object. Using Derby as an example, this is what it would look like in fieldtypederby.xml: <field-type-def type="blob" sql-type="BLOB" java-type="java.sql.Blob"></field-type-def> <field-type-def type="byte-array" sql-type="BLOB" java-type="byte[]"></field-type-def> <field-type-def type="object" sql-type="BLOB" java-type="java.lang.Object"></field-type-def> Getting an object from each field type would return the respective Java object type. What do you think? -Adrian
