Hi, > > So if we introduce a flag that uses the same instance on attach, we > > might want to have the flag called CopyOnMakePersistent and have > > true be the current specified behavior and false be the new > > behavior we've been discussing. > > Sounds great to me. There's some fine print here, though: Just > because CopyOnMakePersistent is set to true, that doesn't mean that > makePersistent() will *always* return copies. For example, current > specified behavior says that when DetachAllOnCommit=false and calling > makePersistent() with a transient parameter, the returned object will > be the same instance, now transitioned to persistent-clean. This > behavior won't change because of our new option (regardless of > whether it is set to true or false), and we don't want folks to be > confused about that...
I prefer the name you suggested to the one I originally wrote. Comments :- 1. "DetachAllOnCommit" has no bearing on what makePersistent() does - it defines what happens on tx.commit() only. makePersistent will (currently) return the original object if persisting a transient and return a copy if attaching. 2. How about calling it CopyOnAttach ? makePersistent has two roles ... persisting new, and attaching detached. I don't ever see a need to add control to the operation of persisting a new object, so the name "CopyOnAttach" distinguishes to just the attach process. -- Andy (Java Persistent Objects - http://www.jpox.org)
