I'm finding that it's nearly impossible to work with the detaching objects style. I can't tell for sure what's happening other than when I add a PersistenceCapable object to another PersistenceCapable object's collection (i.e., the first one will be the child of the second one) that I get an error about trying to persist objects in different entity groups in the same transaction.
I'm using Spring and subclassing JdoDaoSupport and the transactions are handled for me; I'm not sure if that's part of the problem. With JdoDaoSupport I never need to open or close the persistence manager or start and commit transactions, although I do have an xml file that does the aop proxy wrapping of my classes. a.maza wrote: > I've used the merging of transient objects approach for a while as > described in > http://timepedia.blogspot.com/2009/04/google-appengine-and-gwt-now-marriage.html > and it works quite fine. I only subsituted the proposed implementation > of copying fields by dozer. > > However, I am still thinking to move to the "detaching objects" > approach and played around with it a bit. So far, the detaching > objects approachs seems more cumbersome to me... > > I would be happy to hear some thoughts... > > regards, > andr > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine for Java" group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-java@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
