Actually, I subscribe to the JAWS mailing list as well, and there is a thread of
someone describing exactly this same problem that I have seen. So, I know I am
not on crack...but it still may be an old version problem on my part.
Here is the message from the JAWS list:
Hi,
now I have tried my first time to change an EntityBean value with a set...()
Method but the value in the database was not changed. After shutting down
jBoss, the change was lost.
And why is there a commit after I have get a value ?
Here the log from jBoss:
---- snip ----
[wb/User] Tx is tx:Xid:2
[wb/User] TX_REQUIRED for getRole
[wb/User] Tx is tx:Xid:2
[wb/Workbench] commiting <---- ?
[wb/Workbench] beforeCompletion called
[JAWS] Store command executing: UPDATE wbuser SET loginDate=? WHERE id=?
[JAWS] Set parameter: idx=1, jdbcType=DATE, value=Fri Aug 25 11:30:37
GMT+02:00
2000
[wb/Workbench] afterCompletion called
---- snap ----
CU
---
Ingo Bruell
OBL GmbH ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Hude (Oldenburg)
Germany
Justin Forder wrote:
> Nils
>
> I haven't got all the details straight, but this looks to me like a
> caching problem. The only way I can think of that updates can get
> "undone" in the way you describe is if more than one instance of the
> entity is being held in jBoss.
>
> Marc - any thoughts? (In another post, Nils says he is using up to date
> code from CVS)
>
> Justin
>
> Nils Hartmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I have a very similiar behaviour that Charles reported:
> >I create an entity bean with some initial values (set in ejbCreate()).
> >Looking in the database everything looks fine. Then I update an
> >attribute of my bean (setAttribute()). Calling getAttribute() shows,
> >that the attribute is probably set right.
> >Then I do a findByAttribute with the new value, and - correctly - one
> >RemoteInterface to my entity bean is returned... BUT: calling on this
> >remote interface getAttribute() again, it returnes the old value... The
> >remote interface I've had *before* executing the find method still
> >returns the new value:
> >
> >some dummy code for example:
> >
> >MyBean bean = MyBeanHome.create("aValue"); // sets attribute to aValue
> >-> correct
> >bean.getAttribute() // returns - correct - "aValue"
> >bean.setAttribute("anotherValue"); // hmmm...
> >bean.getAttribute(); // -- returns: "anotherValue"
> >MyBean bean2 = MyBeanHome.findByAttribute("anotherValue"); // returns -
> >correct - remote interface
> >bean.getAttribute(); // -- returns - correct - anotherValue
> >bean2.getAttribute(); // -- returns - FALSE - aValue
> >
> >In the serverlog there is an UPDATE command executed with correct value
> >"anotherValue" after executing setAttribute. Unfortunatly the following
> >both calls to getAttribute are not logged.
> >When my Client stops at this point, the changes are correct in the
> >database, but when it does a further call to a third method, another
> >UPDATE command is executed, with the OLD value :-(:
> >
> >bean.domeSomethingElse(); // ---> causes an UPDATE bean with old
> >("aValue")
> >
> >I tried to get the bug, but I think I haven't understand enough how the
> >container works yet. Hopefully that will be better some day, at least if
> >there are a lot more bugs ;-). I'm not sure, where the bean itself is
> >loaded from the database ?!
> >
> >regards! nils
> >
> >
> >>
> >> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Charles Crain
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
> >> >I have been experimenting with container-managed persistence in JBoss.
> >> >What I cannot figure out is what triggers the server to save the
> >> >currently loaded entity beans to the database. I've tried running the
> >> >CD example, as well as a test bean I wrote myself. When you create the
> >> >bean, JBoss creates a database entry with the primary key populated, and
> >> >all other fields blank. When you start setting properties of the Bean,
> >> >they are not updated in the database. If you stop the server (or the
> >> >machine crashes, etc.) the database stays that way -- primary keys but
> >> >no data.
> >> >
> >> >I figured a graceful shutdown of the server would at least flush the
> >> >data to the database, but this does not appear to be the case.
> >> >Furthermore, if the server were to crash, lose power, etc., all new data
> >> >would be lost.
> >> >
> >> >Does anyone know a way to change this?
> >> >
> >> >-Charles
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >--
> >> >--------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> >To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> >Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> >
> >>
> >> --
> >> Justin Forder
> >>
> >> --
> >> --------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
> --
> Justin Forder
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
