> With the DataTable, you can also run queries on it, sort it, define parent > child relationships (aka Foreign Key) with other data tables, it stores > history of changes, create views of it, have listeners on data change (I > think). It is like an in memory database pretty much. I think the > similarities to a JDBC result set end at the idea of having rows and > columns.
I see. Well, I have no plans just yet, of implementing an in-memory database cache ;-) I guess, in the whole LINQ world, blending in-memory C# / VB.NET tables with actual SQL Server tables starts making sense, though. > I don't think a DataTable works in "eager" mode. It works offline, a > changeset is calculated and applied to the database. Yes, good luck with concurrency, there :-) > Bear in mind I haven't used this for about 6 years :), but I often find a > lot of good ideas in the .Net world. Even if my preference is Java. Yes, I agree. > Regaring the .remove() functionality you mentioned, I've implemented > something similar in my project where records not yet in the database, if > .remove() is called they are just discarded client side. If they are in the > database, then the .remove() when flushed will execute a DELETE on the > database (first with an optimistic locking check). This kind of > functionality built in would be great. It would save implementing all the > logic and "tracking" my records. Sounds good. Although you'll still have to track *some* data, because of jOOQ being unaware of transaction rollbacks... Cheers Lukas -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jOOQ User Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
