I'm seeing a stack overflow from inside Transfer 1.1 but all the
relevant relationships are lazy so it doesn't make any sense.
This is the Transfer.xml:
http://svn.riaforge.org/saa/trunk/library/com/stellr/config/transfer/transfer.xml
The stack trace is cut off and it doesn't seem to be
I thought I'd share what I've done to accomplish what I needed. I have
solved the problem a couple of different ways.
1.) Interceptor for Transfer transactions
Since Transfer's AOP was giving me nightmares, I wrote a quick
interceptor with this method:
cffunction name=adviseAction
I could break it down further but not in 2 1 file. I have coldspring
loading everything and then I have a decorator/service/gateway all
which derive from an Abstract Parent. I just tried it with another
object to see If I could replicate the issue and sure enough it did. I
know im doing something
So I got some time to finally look at this and I think I have found
the issue. When I save using the method I created in my
abstractDecorator I am having the issue.
cfset userTO = application.userService.get(form.userId)
!--- populate the user bean with our form props ---
OMG yeah that would do it ;o)
getTransferObject() returns the underlying TO.
The cache synchronisation would find that the object in cache is different
to the one you currently have, and try and resolve it.
Erk...
Glad you worked it out.
Mark
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 6:13 AM, Dan Vega
Thanks for the help Mark!
On Jun 30, 5:43 pm, Mark Mandel mark.man...@gmail.com wrote:
OMG yeah that would do it ;o)
getTransferObject() returns the underlying TO.
The cache synchronisation would find that the object in cache is different
to the one you currently have, and try and resolve
Is doing this a bad idea?
object name=Thingy table=thingy sequence=THINGY_KEY_SEQ
id name=id type=numeric column=key_num/
property name=a type=string column=a/
onetomany name=AnotherThiny lazy=true
link to=thingies.AnotherThingy
Doesn't the lazy one need to do more queries making it slower?
Or is the end result much the same?
2009/7/1 Mark Mandel mark.man...@gmail.com
Why not just make it lazy all the time?
Seems to me like you're just doubling your effort from not much gain.
Mark
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 3:45 PM,
