Hi Andy, On Jul 21, 2007, at 10:48 AM, Andy Jefferson wrote:
Hi Craig,This brings up a question. In JPOX, if you enhance a class with a field that is NotPersistent, can you then in an embedded use case mark the same field as Persistent?The only situation I'd currently thought of (but never tried) would be of not persisting a field that had been defined as persistent (not the otherway around). The JPOX Enhancer doesn't do anything special in thissituation so if the user enhanced it as non-persistent and tried that itwould likely fail.I've certainly seen some situations where a particular class is defined with a full persistence definition, but when stored embedded only a subsetof the fields are wanted to be persisted.More questions than answers. Are we sure that it's a good idea to allow overriding the PersistenceModifier in embedded usages?I'd like to allow the "downgrade" option (not persist a persistable field) since it should be common enough when embedding. As you pointed out, the "upgrade" option creates problems and would require special treatment toallow it so I've no problem ruling it out.
Ok, I've restored PersistenceModifier and I'll put in some javadoc to indicate where it might productively be used.
Thanks, Craig
-- Andy Java Persistent Objects (JPOX)
Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
