I've had this problem too. The issue is that the result set is being closed prematurely because the "eager-release" attribute in the connection descriptor was set to true;
if you can try setting this to false. I was able to do this without any probs because I'nm using tomcat, the problem appeared because i tried to port to jboss and changed the eager release setting. cheers Jin ----- Original Message ----- From: "McCaffrey, John G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'OJB Users List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 3:46 PM Subject: RE: Partial collection problem > Rob, > I have had this problem to, and posted all the info that I could to try to > diagnose the issue, to no avail. I ended up just coding a work around to get > what I needed. > I noticed that when I ran a query to get the count of expected objects, the > count I got back was right, but the collection was always n+1 (just as you > described). > For the workaround I first get an enumeration of primary keys (because that > works as expected), then go through each of the referenced tables, and build > a hashmap of the rest of the objects that I need. Then I piece them together > at the end, and return a collection of 'Whole' objects. I think its actually > faster than the OJB code would have been, because its fewer trips to the DB. > > I had to do this workaround, even though it is a little clunky, because we > are going to production soon, and I wasn't able to solve the original > Collection problem. I only have one class with a collection, so I only had > to do the workaround once. I am hoping that the issue gets resolved, because > I don't want to have to code any more OJB workarounds, and I don't want to > abandon OJB when we move to the next project. > > Are you able to determine what the issue is? > Previous postings pointed to JBoss issues, but I have websphere and DB2 (my > issue could be my JDBC driver, I haven't tried any others). > > It seemed to me that a resultSet was being closed early. > > please post if you resolve the issue > > -John > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rob Kischuk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 7:09 AM > To: 'OJB Users List' > Subject: RE: Partial collection problem > > > Thanks for the suggestion. I built from the latest code in CVS last night, > and still had the same problem. > > -Rob > > -----Original Message----- > From: Armin Waibel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 7:23 PM > To: OJB Users List > Subject: Re: Partial collection problem > > Hi Rob, > > I think this is an known issue, please try > latest CVS. > > regards, > Armin > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Rob Kischuk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 3:31 PM > Subject: RE: Partial collection problem > > > > This is a big problem - we have a collection of 200 items that we are > > retrieving, and the first query only retrieves a single item, with > each > > subsequent query retrieving one more item (e.g. - the fifth query > result has > > 5 items). > > > > This seems to be either a very nasty error on my part, or a major bug. > Can > > anyone shed some additional light on this? Is it a bug? Is there a > > workaround? This is a major showstopper for OJB on an application > we're > > working on, and could require some major rework. > > > > -Rob > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Rob Kischuk > > Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 9:43 AM > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Subject: Partial collection problem > > > > I saw a discussion cross this list a while back regarding this same > problem, > > but with no solution. The problem is this: when I run a query to > load a > > collection of objects that contain other objects, the first call > retrieves > > only the first item in the collection. The second call retrieves a > total of > > 2 items, the third, a total of 3 items, and so on. Obviously, the > correct > > functionality would be to have all of the items in the collection > retrieved > > on the first call. > > > > > > > > I described the issue in great detail as a part of Defect OJB172: > > > http://scarab.werken.com/issues/curmodule/120/tqk/0/template/ViewIssue.v > m/id > > /OJB172/issuelist/-1/issuelist/1/issuelist/OJB172 > > > <http://scarab.werken.com/issues/curmodule/120/tqk/0/template/ViewIssue. > vm/i > > d/OJB172/issuelist/-1/issuelist/1/issuelist/OJB172> > > > > > > > > But it appears that the defect hasn't been touched since I entered it. > Is > > there a known fix or workaround for it? > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > Rob > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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]
