Right @Persistent solves it, not sure why it is not activated by default
then, any idea?


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
<http://www.tomitribe.com>

2015-05-21 0:05 GMT+02:00 Rick Curtis <[email protected]>:

> > seems today only serialization can be used using @Externalizer/@Factory.
>
> I don't think that's the case[1][2]. For some reason I couldn't cleanly
> apply your patch to trunk, but can you try adding a @Persistent annotation
> to your CustomDate ? Also, take a look at
> org.apache.openjpa.persistence.fields.TestEnumSets
> to see if it is close to the scenario you're looking at trying to fix?
>
> [1] If your externalized field is not a standard persistent type, you must
> explicitly mark it persistent. In OpenJPA, you can force a persistent field
> by annotating it with org.apache.openjpa.persistence.Persistent
> <
> http://ci.apache.org/projects/openjpa/trunk/docbook/manual.html#ref_guide_meta_jpa_persistent
> >
>  annotation.
>
> [2]
>
> http://ci.apache.org/projects/openjpa/trunk/docbook/manual.html#ref_guide_pc_extern
>
> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 8:38 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > seems today only serialization can be used using @Externalizer/@Factory.
> > However when both rely on the same type and the type is easy enough (let
> > take the so common String example) I think we can map it 1-1 in the
> > database. Advantage is you can use any sql too to update the values.
> >
> > Opened a task and proposed a patch for it
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-2589
> >
> > wdyt?
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
> > <http://www.tomitribe.com>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *Rick Curtis*
>

Reply via email to