On Dec 14, 11:06 pm, "Max Ross (Google)" <maxr+appeng...@google.com> wrote: > Ok I've got good news for you. I need to do more testing but I think > different parent types for child objects should work fine as long as you use > list-ordering for your one-to-many relationships, which you really ought to > be doing anyway. Position properties are already incredibly inefficient, > and it turns out the bug you're running into only applies when there are > position properties in play. You can read more about it in this > section:http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/java/datastore/relationships.ht... > Ordered Collections Maintain Their Order). > > So, if you change your one-to-many relationship on RatePlan to: > @Persistent > @Order(extensions = @Extension(vendorName="datanucleus", > key="list-ordering", value="id"))
Does this affect JPA modeling as well, and if so, how does the above map to JPA annotations? (I assume the "value" is the key field, so if using Key, it should work too?) -- 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-j...@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.
