It is happening with postgres 8.3 On Mon, 2010-07-05 at 17:27 +0700, Hans Bakker wrote: > Hi Adrian, > > Could it be of the new field types? one of my customers got the > following error when completing an order: > > ERROR: Could not complete the Create ShipmentPackageRouteSeg > [file:/E:/workspace/ofbiz959845/applications/product/script/org/ofbiz/shipment/shipment/ShipmentServices.xml#createShipmentPackageRouteSeg] > process [problem creating the newEntity value: Error while inserting: > [GenericEntity:ShipmentPackageRouteSeg][createdStamp,2010-07-05 > 17:26:17.623(java.sql.Timestamp)][lastUpdatedStamp,2010-07-05 > 17:26:17.623(java.sql.Timestamp)][lastUpdatedTxStamp,2010-07-05 > 17:26:17.216(java.sql.Timestamp)][shipmentId,538260(java.lang.String)][shipmentPackageSeqId,00001(java.lang.String)][shipmentRouteSegmentId,00001(java.lang.String)] > (SQL Exception while executing the following:INSERT INTO > public.SHIPMENT_PACKAGE_ROUTE_SEG (SHIPMENT_ID, SHIPMENT_PACKAGE_SEQ_ID, > SHIPMENT_ROUTE_SEGMENT_ID, TRACKING_CODE, BOX_NUMBER, LABEL_IMAGE, > LABEL_INTL_SIGN_IMAGE, LABEL_HTML, LABEL_PRINTED, INTERNATIONAL_INVOICE, > PACKAGE_TRANSPORT_COST, PACKAGE_SERVICE_COST, PACKAGE_OTHER_COST, COD_AMOUNT, > INSURED_AMOUNT, CURRENCY_UOM_ID, LAST_UPDATED_STAMP, LAST_UPDATED_TX_STAMP, > CREATED_STAMP, CREATED_TX_STAMP) VALUES (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, > ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?) (ERROR: column "label_image" is of type bytea but > expression is of type oid))] > [5:00:12 PM] yasin.lyyas(Virt.village): OFBiz revision number: R959845 > > > > > > On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 07:57 -0700, Adrian Crum wrote: > > Of course. If the blob field type is used for a byte array or serialized > > object, it still works but it generates a warning that suggests the correct > > field type. > > > > -Adrian > > > > --- On Sat, 6/26/10, Jacques Le Roux <jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: > > > > > From: Jacques Le Roux <jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> > > > Subject: Re: Discussion: New Field Types > > > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org > > > Date: Saturday, June 26, 2010, 12:19 PM > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
-- Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates.
