urgent 3 level Inheritance problem

Hi All, we have class A, Class B extends A and has a super reference-descriptor to A, Class C extends B and has a super reference-descriptor to B when we retrieve an instance of C and update a field which is part of A class it doesn't work. I debugged OJB source and found out this happens

Re: urgent 3 level Inheritance problem

Ziv Yankowitz wrote: is it possible to configure OJB not to store the references in a Map. Without going into your detailed question; I think you should be able to work around any problems by implementing equals and hashCode in your beans such that instance of A.equals(instance of B) or instance

RE: urgent 3 level Inheritance problem

Thanks for the response, I tried to implement the hashCode and equals and it still doesn't work, somehow the beforeImage and the currentImage are working with the same instance of the AnonymousPersistentFieldForInheritance object in map. Thanks Ziv -Original Message- From: [EMAIL

Re: urgent 3 level Inheritance problem

Ziv Yankowitz wrote: I tried to implement the hashCode and equals and it still doesn't work, somehow the beforeImage and the currentImage are working with the same instance of the AnonymousPersistentFieldForInheritance object in map. Silly me. Since your beans are not the objects stored in the

Re: urgent 3 level Inheritance problem

Hi Ziv, it's a known issue that odmg-api does not support mapping classes on multiple joined tables (see release notes). I will add some improvements to odmg-api today (hope so ;-)) which seems to solve the problems with inheritance (expect the one that is known in PB-api). regards, Armin Ziv

RE: urgent 3 level Inheritance problem

Hi Armin, so is there a way to avoid the caching of references even in the cost of performance? Thanks Ziv. -Original Message- From: Armin Waibel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2005 3:19 PM To: OJB Users List Subject: Re: urgent 3 level Inheritance problem Hi Ziv,

Re: urgent 3 level Inheritance problem

Ziv Yankowitz wrote: Hi Armin, so is there a way to avoid the caching of references even in the cost of performance? think this is not possible, because the caching of the references is the character of the anonymous fields. Armin Thanks Ziv. -Original Message- From: Armin Waibel

RE: urgent 3 level Inheritance problem

one last question then, if in AnonymousPersistentField i comment the putToFieldCache every thing seems to be working well, would you recommend I do it. since we have also stress our application and it seems that the RefernceMap is not cleared leading to OutOfMemory in the end. Thanks A Lot

Re: urgent 3 level Inheritance problem

Ziv Yankowitz wrote: one last question then, if in AnonymousPersistentField i comment the putToFieldCache every thing seems to be working well, would you recommend I do it. If all your tests pass ... try it. But I recommend to write tests to verify your improvement (as starting point you can

Updating instead of Inserting

I have 4 classes: AdmObject -- highlevel class that all of our persistent classes extend. Contains objectId field. Generic Group -- Abstract. Extends AdmObject. Contains common fields for NewClientGroup and Subgroup and the ojbConcreteClass. NewClientGroup -- extends Generic Group, contains a

Re: Updating instead of Inserting

Hi Wes, why did you need mapping for AdmObject when only one class extent AdmObject? In mapping for NCG collection-descriptor name=subgroups element-class-ref=model.client.Subgroup auto-delete=true auto-update=true

RE: Updating instead of Inserting

Thanks Armen, that worked. I've made this same mistake before, you would think I'd learn :) The AdmObject will have many more extents in the full application. Every persistent class will extend it, or a subclass of it. I only had one class extending it in this subset. -Original

Re: Updating instead of Inserting

Lemke, Wesley wrote: Thanks Armen, that worked. I've made this same mistake before, you would think I'd learn :) ...you are in good company, the history of mankind is an endless list of repeated mistakes ;-) The AdmObject will have many more extents in the full application. Every persistent

Too slow for startup

Hi! I'm researching with NetBeans Profiler, and I found interesting that OJB takes near to 3739ms running method ...ClassHelper.getClass(String,boolean), in 4367 calls... I think I have not too many beans at my app... Someone else tried OJB with profiling tools? Thanks for any tips, -- Edson

RE: Updating instead of Inserting

I am persisting the objects fine now, but I am getting an error when retrieving: [3/22/05 12:44:43:008 CST] 39432342 SystemOut O [PersistentField] ERROR: while set field: [try to set 'object value' in 'target object' target obj class: model.client.NewClientGroup target field name:

Re: urgent 3 level Inheritance problem

Armin Waibel wrote: Hi Ziv, it's a known issue that odmg-api does not support mapping classes on multiple joined tables (see release notes). I will add some improvements to odmg-api today (hope so ;-)) which seems to solve the problems with inheritance (expect the one that is known in PB-api).