Hi, In our repository, all our 1-many relations are CollectionProxies, with auto-retrieve=yes.
Let's take a simple (hypotehtical) example of a Group with many Members. If we lock the "Group" for write, it seems that the contents CollectionProxy is materialized, and all the "Members" are locked for write as well. Our object graph is large; one object may have many collections. If we lock the parent object for write, we will get many queries executed (tip for the unaware : use the p6spy driver for excellent SQL logging) to lock the its many children. This, to my mind, is very innefficient. With dynamic proxies (for object references), the actual registering seems to be defered until materialization time (See TransactionImpl line 587 ish). This is a sort of question/request : Is this difference between CollectionProxies and DynamicProxies intended ? If it is, then what is the reasoning ? And if not, can I call this a bug , and ask for this deferring of registering also be applied to the CollectionProxy too ? Cheers, Charles. This email and any attachments are strictly confidential and are intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient you must not disclose, forward, copy or take any action in reliance on this message or its attachments. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender as soon as possible and delete it from your computer systems. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of HPD Software Limited or its affiliates. At present the integrity of email across the internet cannot be guaranteed and messages sent via this medium are potentially at risk. All liability is excluded to the extent permitted by law for any claims arising as a re- sult of the use of this medium to transmit information by or to HPD Software Limited or its affiliates. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
