On Aug 6, 2009, at 00:16 , Pinaki Poddar wrote:
Hi,
I have not come across vertical and horizontal analogy w.r.t. fetch
plan -
and it did provide a neat imagery. But this analogy still refers to
a 'boxy'
or tabular world view popularized (or monopolized) by RDBMS.
Yes I fully agree.
If
Hi,
1. are you enhancing your entities at build-time? If not, try that first.
Does enhancement work without warning?
-
Pinaki
--
View this message in context:
http://n2.nabble.com/overriding-accesors-in-entity-need-tranisent-declaration-tp3363414p3395146.html
Sent from the OpenJPA User
Hi,
I have not come across vertical and horizontal analogy w.r.t. fetch plan -
and it did provide a neat imagery. But this analogy still refers to a 'boxy'
or tabular world view popularized (or monopolized) by RDBMS.
If one thinks 'out of the box', then
a) a query for objects select a li
1. "OpenJPA 2.0 requires JDK 6 compiler to build and JRE 6 runtime" -- that
sounds reasonable. I think we should move to that position and
streamline/simplify build for OpenJPA 2.0 branch.
2. "OpenJPA 1.2.x requires JDK 5 compiler to build and JRE 5 runtime. Will
not run on JRE 6" -- that is a f
Hi,
The concept of Fetch Plan in particular and the perspective of data as
graph (as opposed to rows in a table) are prevalent in non-RDBMS world for
many years. JDO (JSR-12) -a precursor to JPA in many ways - had specified
FetchPlan in its API. The "only RDBMS" view of the world does not see fe
Hi Jean-Baptiste,
Thanks for your comments regarding the utility of the fetch plan in
OpenJPA. The concept of a fetch plan with fetch groups is more than
three years old but is still not widely adopted nor standardized in JPA.
Your description of "horizontal" versus "vertical" filtering is
Any comments on that vision ?
On Aug 5, 2009, at 16:33 , Jean-Baptiste BRIAUD -- Novlog wrote:
The need is simple : get trees of partially valuated business object
instances from the "big graph" of possible linked business classes.
The fact came from old SQooL (a bad IT joke from old school and
Hi Craig,
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
> Database users are notorious for wanting stability, even if it means
> running back-level releases. Somehow they manage to coerce vendors into
> supporting them on their running systems.
>
> To get an accurate idea of our users' r
Database users are notorious for wanting stability, even if it means
running back-level releases. Somehow they manage to coerce vendors
into supporting them on their running systems.
To get an accurate idea of our users' requirements, perhaps we need to
include users@ in this discussion. Do
I filed: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-1227
In investigating further I also found that a field from the subclass must
also be selected to trigger the error (such that the variable seld in
JDBCStoreManager.selectBaseMappings() is set to 1). In the issue I attached
a patch which force
Hello,
Seems I am completely knotted in a convoluted class graph without any hint
from documentation, spec or forum archive.
Could somebody enlighten me if it is possible to:
A. Have a Key in a persistent Map such as
1. the Key has a composite ID composed of classes which have composite IDs
t
Udi wrote:
>
> Hey,
> I have this case:
>
> class Book{
> @id
> protected long id;
> private static number = 0;
>
> @prePersist
> private void makeSomeID(){
>id = ++number;
> }
> }
>
> class Persister{
> public static void main(...){
>
Hi,
See if externalization on COL2 helps to coerce NUMBER to VARCHAR2 :
http://openjpa.apache.org/builds/latest/docs/manual/manual.html#ref_guide_pc_extern
RamAESIS wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a requirement as mentioned below:
>
> Table A has a column COL1 of type VARCHAR2, table B has
Hi Claudio,
More comments inline below...
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 3:14 AM, Claudio Di Vita wrote:
>
> Kevin Sutter wrote:
> >
> > Hi Claudio,
> > You mention in an earlier post that when you turn on SQL Trace that you
> > see
> > all of the Inserts getting created. So, does that mean that if you
RamAESIS wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a requirement as mentioned below:
>
> Table A has a column COL1 of type VARCHAR2, table B has column COL2 of
> type NUMBER. When i provide the COL2 as join column for the @OneToMany
> annotations OpenJPA is throwing an exception for type mismatch. Is there
>
The need is simple : get trees of partially valuated business object
instances from the "big graph" of possible linked business classes.
The fact came from old SQooL (a bad IT joke from old school and old
SQL) :
1. only get back from DB what you need.
2. the other thing is to try to make as fe
I already read that blog post and that's after reading it that I
decided to try OpenJPA.
I spent a lot of time as a consultant, in previous life, to educate
people to that concept in the early 2002-2003.
It was with OJB (as far as I remember) and I didn't know how to name
that "thing".
That
> That is really so po-wer-full : it works also on request and it solve
entierly the problem !
fyi...
http://webspherepersistence.blogspot.com/2009/02/dynamic-fetch-planning.html
-
Pinaki
--
View this message in context:
http://n2.nabble.com/Dynamic-fetch-plan-question-tp3350020p3
Hi,
> I can tell OpenJPA rocks, what I did had been tested impossible to do with
> other frameworks.
Good to know that you found OpenJPA useful.
Will you please elaborate which aspects/features of OpenJPA are distinct
from other frameworks in your view?
-
Pinaki
--
View this message i
Kevin Sutter wrote:
>
> Hi Claudio,
> You mention in an earlier post that when you turn on SQL Trace that you
> see
> all of the Inserts getting created. So, does that mean that if you turn
> Trace on that it seems to affect the processing and everything works as
> expected? Or, do you see SQL
20 matches
Mail list logo
