Re: JDO API compability with JDK 1.3 (issue)

Hi Erik,Thanks. The protocol is that the person who filed the JIRA issue (this is you) should mark it RESOLVED once they have verified that the patch has been checked in and it solves the issue.Thanks,CraigOn Jul 26, 2005, at 12:51 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hi Craig,Your last patch solved the iss

Re: TCK : updates required

Hi Andy, I checked in all these fixes and then some. I also added the serialized="true" tag where needed (JDO-82). -- Michelle Andy Jefferson wrote: I'll look at the Map cases next Michelle, Here's some initial comments on the map tests. 1. HashMapStringKeyCollections : Field "Hash

JDO API compability with JDK 1.3 (issue)

Hi Craig, Your last patch solved the issue. Let me know if I have to change the issue status Regards, Erik Bengtson

Re: Patch for JIRA JDO-96

Hi Michael,On Jul 26, 2005, at 8:50 AM, Michael Watzek wrote:Hi Craig,I'll have to leave now and will check that tomorrow.Do you mean the "org/apache/jdo/tck/pc/singlefieldidentity/package.jdo" under directory applicationidentity?I mean:Property changes on: test/jdo/datastoreidentity/org/apache/jdo

Re: Patch for JIRA JDO-96

Hi Craig, I'll have to leave now and will check that tomorrow. Do you mean the "org/apache/jdo/tck/pc/singlefieldidentity/package.jdo" under directory applicationidentity? Regards, Michael Hi Michael, Thanks for the patch. Question: Why is the package.jdo file marked as "executable" in sv

Re: Patch for JIRA JDO-96

Hi Michael,Thanks for the patch.Question: Why is the package.jdo file marked as "executable" in svn? Configuration error in your maven setup?CraigOn Jul 26, 2005, at 6:04 AM, Michael Watzek wrote:Hi Michelle,please find the attached patch fixing JIRA JDO-96 (Error reading the JDO Meta-Data file "or

Re: ALTER TABLE clauses in TCK schemas

Hi Michael, I fixed this yesterday in commit r225174 by adding UNIQUE NOT NULL constraints to the referenced fields. -- Michelle Michael Watzek wrote: Hi Michelle, the "ALTER TABLE" statements below fail for datastore identity because there is no unique key on the referenced columns:

Re: ALTER TABLE clauses in TCK schemas

Thanks for noticing this, Michael. I will delete the REFERENCES part of the CREATE TABLE statements. I added the ALTER TABLE statements in order to have a named constraint, so I want to keep those. -- Michelle Michael Watzek wrote: Hi Michelle, the TCK schemas for application identity and

Re: ALTER TABLE clauses in TCK schemas

Hi Michelle, the "ALTER TABLE" statements below fail for datastore identity because there is no unique key on the referenced columns: [java] ij> ALTER TABLE project_reviewer [java] ADD CONSTRAINT PR_PROJ_FK FOREIGN KEY [java] (PROJID) REFERENCES projects(PROJID); [j

Re: ALTER TABLE clauses in TCK schemas

Hi Michelle, I just noticed that the foreign key names in the "ALTER TABLE" statements below are used in the orm meta data. For this reason, I suggest to keep the "ALTER TABLE" statements and instead drop the REFERENCE clauses in the column defintions below. Regards, Michael Hi Michelle,

Patch for JIRA JDO-96

Hi Michelle, please find the attached patch fixing JIRA JDO-96 (Error reading the JDO Meta-Data file "org/apache/jdo/tck/pc/singlefieldidentity/package.jdo". Cause : {1}). The patch adds a package JDO file to package "org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.singlefieldidentity" for datastoreidentity. All class

Re: Question about orm metadata for inheritance

Michael, We dont support "Insurance.insid" (SuperclassName.fieldName). On a related issue, we also dont support fetch plans/indexes declared with SuperclassName.fieldName, fieldName#key, fieldName#value or fieldName#element. Regards, Erik Bengtson Quoting Michael Watzek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >

Re: Question about orm metadata for inheritance

Hi Erik, I'm just curious. Can you explain in more detail which parts of the orm metadata JPOX does not support right now? Is it inheritance strategy "new-table" in conjunction with a element, or the repitition of superclass fields in subclasses? Regards, Michael Michael, No it is not va

Re: Question about orm metadata for inheritance

Michael, No it is not valid. The below is valid, I think. JPOX does not support the above syntax, yet. Regards, Erik Bengtson Quoting Michael Watzek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hi Craig, Andy, Erik, > > I'm testing a kind of inheritance mapping using strategy "new-table" > where each tab

Question about orm metadata for inheritance

Hi Craig, Andy, Erik, I'm testing a kind of inheritance mapping using strategy "new-table" where each table contains columns for all fields. Thus, a table of a subclass contains columns for the declared fields *and* for the fields of all superclasses, e.g. this is the orm metadata of classes

ALTER TABLE clauses in TCK schemas

Hi Michelle, the TCK schemas for application identity and datastore indentity both contain two "ALTER TABLE" statements on table "project_reviewer". I think, both statements are redundant, because in the "CREATE TABLE" statement of table "project_reviewer" column "PROJID" as well as column "R

Re: TCK : updates required

> I'll look at the Map cases next Michelle, Here's some initial comments on the map tests. 1. HashMapStringKeyCollections : Field "HashMapOfString_SimpleInterface7" is a Map with the value embedded, and no join table. I interpret that as needing to serialise the map into the main table, but unf

Re: TCK : updates required

Hi Michelle, > Thanks for the problem report. I've fixed these and checked them in. Thanks. > If you find more, please let me know. I think these tests are hitting > problems before they reveal my typos, so they are hard for me to find. I agree - which is why I thought it would be more effici