Hi Jakob, great work!!
regards, Armin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jakob Braeuchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "OJB Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 11:00 AM Subject: Re: OJB test failures > hi thomas, > > field conversion should be ok now. all conversion testcases pass. > i also fixed a minor glitch in collection proxy clear() which makes > MtoNMmapping pass as well. > > jakob > > Thomas Mahler wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > Jakob Braeuchi wrote: > > > >> hi andrew, > >> > >> i changed Identity to do a convertToSql when called with an object, > >> no conversion takes place when called with pkValues. > >> with this change all conversion test are passed. i have a version > >> where conversion takes place during binding of the variables, but > >> this version fails on the referrer test :( > >> > >> should we drop conversion of pk values completely ? > > > > > > There are several users that use some kind of GUID objects as primary > > key attributes. Those GUID need FieldConversions to be mapped to a > > (e.g.) VARCHAR column. > > So dropping this feature is not an option. > > > > We have to make sure that FieldConversions are properly applied for pk > > fields too. > > > > cheers, > > Thomas > > > >> > >> jakob > >> > >> Andrew Gilbert wrote: > >> > >>> Armin, > >>> > >>> Thank you very much for this! I will build latest and re-test soon. > >>> The bummer is, it would be a major impediment to our use of OJB if > >>> we couldn't convert on pk fields. We use a custom GUID impl for the > >>> pk in many of our BO's and tables. > >>> > >>> Not sure I fully understand yet the Identity change. Sounds like you > >>> are saying internal state was inconsistent? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> ###### > >>>> I think the made changes are correct, because the conversion > >>>> was not transparent for the user of the Identity object. I suggest > >>>> never use converted (java --> sql) pk fields within Identity > >>>> (I don't know if code base is comply with this suggest, > >>>> maybe that's the reason for the hassle). > >>>> The conversion could be done when it's necessary. > >>>> But nevertheless I think there is a nasty bug when using > >>>> field conversion with pk fields. > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- - > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
