I would think you'd want to be out of the guts too, that just seems a bit
too closely coupled with JBoss for the persistence manager. Shouldn't the
CMP persistence manager be some type of layer on top (well almost on top)
with a well defined interface? This should clearly tie in to take advantage
of what the container can provide.
I am definitely on the outside of JBoss though, so marc et al are the people
to listen to.
Cheers
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Burke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 2:53 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Where is everyone today?
Yo Dain,
I know absolutely nothing about CMP 2.x Relationships, but it makes me
really worried that you are working directly with EntityEnterpriseContexts
from the container.cache. Why aren't you going through the HOME interfaces
to access related beans? Remember, each entity type can have entirely
different datastores, caching mechanisms, locking mechanisms,
synchronization mechanisms, and pooling mechanisms. You shouldn't really be
circumventing how to access a bean. If I'm totally out of my league here,
I'll just apologize and shut up. Let me know, but in the meantime, I'll try
to review the CMP 2.x Relationships.
Bill
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dain
> Sundstrom
> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 2:22 PM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: [JBoss-dev] Where is everyone today?
>
>
> Is everyone on vacation? Is the list working? What-ever, doesn't really
> matter.
>
> If any one is around today, and can reply to my message, I would greatly
> appreciate it. I kind of need some guidance on the decision to create an
> interceptor or not. I'm going to continue along the line that I
> don't need
> an interceptor (I can always add it later).
>
> If you all are on vacation, have a great time.
>
> -dain
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dain Sundstrom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 11:48 PM
> > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] CMP 2.x Relationships Implementation
> >
> >
> > marc,
> >
> > Do you mean that I should be setting invoked, or something else?
> >
> > I got the bi-directional one-to-one (enforced integrity)
> > working using the
> > entity cache, but it gives me a bad feeling. In the this
> > case, there may be
> > up to 4 beans that need to be stored:
> >
> > before:
> > a1--b1
> > a2--b2
> >
> > a1.setB(b2)
> >
> > after:
> > a1\ b1
> > a2 \b2
> >
> > So, I hold onto up to three other contexts. When my store is
> > called, I write
> > my state and then store the other contexts (with their
> > respective mangers).
> > This won't cause extraneous writes as 'tuned updates' is always on.
> >
> > What is giving me the bad feeling is I have just cut out all
> > of the work
> > that is being done in the interceptors, specifically
> > EntitySynchronizationInterceptor. For example, do I need to remove the
> > context from the cache at the end of the transaction? Do I
> > need to lock the
> > context? What if one of the beans is removed? (the new remove
> > procedure for
> > relationships may handle this, but haven't implemented it yet)
> >
> > As you can tell this has given me a lot of concern. If this is stuff I
> > shouldn't worry about, good. If I should worry, will it be
> > better to create
> > the new interceptor, thus reusing the code in the other
> > interceptors, or
> > will it be easier to handle the few special cases in the
> > persistence store?
> >
> > -dain
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: marc fleury [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 9:53 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] CMP 2.x Relationships Implementation
> > >
> > >
> > > also be sure to report right here is you touch any of the
> > > information in the
> > > ctx (using setters)
> > >
> > > marcf
> > >
> > > |-----Original Message-----
> > > |From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > |[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> > > Behalf Of Dain
> > > |Sundstrom
> > > |Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 9:45 PM
> > > |To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > > |Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] CMP 2.x Relationships Implementation
> > > |
> > > |
> > > |> | The only way I can find to get a ctx for a pk
> > > |> |is from EntityInstanceInterceptor, and the only way to
> > get to the
> > > |> |EntityInstanceInterceptor is container.invoke(mi).
> > > |>
> > > |> no no no it's in the cache,
> > > |>
> > > |> container.cache.get(id) (or something like that)
> > > |>
> > > |> marcf
> > > |>
> > > |
> > > |YES! Thanks so much. I didn't want to write the interceptor.
> > > |This is going
> > > |to be way easier. I'm going to go code now.
> > > |
> > > |-dain
> > > |
> > > |_______________________________________________
> > > |Jboss-development mailing list
> > > |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > |http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Jboss-development mailing list
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Jboss-development mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
>
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
