This seems to be at the core of much confusion...hopefully one of the persistence experts will weigh in and enlighten us. I keep watch on this thread and weigh in a bit later, in a rush at the moment!
On Nov 11, 7:39 am, "a.maza" <andr.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am thinking if it makes sense from a design perspektive to model > unowned bi-directional one-to-many relationships.I did some search on > the web but didn't find many thoughts about such type of relationship. > > The two entity types I have should not be in an owned relationship for > some reasons. Thus, I was thinking about using the relation index > pattern as presented at Google I/O (http://code.google.com/intl/de-AT/ > events/io/2009/sessions/BuildingScalableComplexApps.html) > > However, I am not fully happy with that as outlined in another thread > (http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java/browse_thread/ > thread/2bba41ce4699d65e/918fee627cc41e02?#918fee627cc41e02) mainly due > to performance issues when iterating over the keys in memory. > > Thus I was thinking about modeling the two entities in an unowned bi- > directional style implying that I have to update the two entities in > separate transactions in order to keep the relationship between the > two entities. I would like to hear your thoughts about this. My main > concern is consistency when something goes wrong in one of the two > transactions. > > thanks, > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
