Yes, the date is set null outside the JVM and correctly passed back to my DAO. The DAO manages the JPA persist, delete, and/or merge operations.
I can see within my debugger the field is null prior to the merge, and reset to its previous value after the merge. Logging is set to TRACE and I can see no update statements are issued as a result of this merge. It is *most definitely* a JPA-related issue, either due to a bug or some configuration minutia. At this point I'm really looking for someone from the OpenJPA team to comment on the issue, so I can determine a test case and bug report are warranted. I don't want to get off on a side topic about AMF (Adobe) serialization. It's not an issue with my POJO relationships that requires me to disable the detached state field, but how the detached state field object itself is serialized by AMF. Field or accessor annotation shouldn't matter (it's accessor). -jmh On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Jean-Baptiste BRIAUD -- Novlog<j-b.bri...@novlog.com> wrote: > Sorry, but it is not clear at all to me. > Apparently, the date is set to null outside the JVM ... am I right ? > If yes, did you try to force it to null after and before the merge inside > the JVM ? > This test will answer is the problem is in the JVM or outside. > It will also clearout OpenJPA responsability. > For exemple : If this works fine to set to null before the merge in the JVM, > then it is not an OpenJPA bug. > > Also, if it is "wrongly serialized", what is the impacts ? > If an attribute A on POJO is serialized to B in flex, then B is modified but > doesn't exist on the merge operation. > Are you annotating the accessors or the fields ? > > On Aug 21, 2009, at 14:38 , Jason Hanna wrote: > >> I've been working with OpenJPA for a while. Don't know why I've never >> tried to do this before or if it's something new. >> >> That's the idea. You detach an object so it can be passed to a client >> outside your JVM for modification. In my case it's a the Flash player >> on a user's browser. >> >> Normally the detached state field and detached state manager help to >> optimize the merge/re-attach process, but in my case the detached >> state field was being improperly serialized by Flex and BlazeDS. The >> OpenJPA docs suggest you should be able to merge detached objects >> without using this field, as long as you're keeping a version field >> and have primary keys properly setup and identified. >> >> I have a rather complex model of linked objects, and merge nested, >> detached objects fairly regularly in code. >> >> Don't know why I haven't noticed this before, but it's occurring on >> what seems to be a fairly trivial use case. A Date/Timestamp set to >> null on the top-level object is passed in but not detected during the >> attach/merge process. >> >> Thanks for trying to help, though, and good luck with your own projects. >> >> Regards, >> -jmh >> >> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 7:58 AM, Jean-Baptiste BRIAUD -- >> Novlog<j-b.bri...@novlog.com> wrote: >>> >>> Are you sure the object is attached or at least merged and only after >>> that >>> you set the date to null ? >>> In fact, I'm not, yet:-), OpenJPA expert but it look like the >>> modification >>> happened when detached and so is ignored. >>> >>> On Aug 21, 2009, at 13:37 , Jason Hanna wrote: >>> >>>> Yes. Classes are enhanced at build time as a task in the Maven build >>>> process. >>>> >>>> I suspect the issue may be related to the fact I've needed to turn off >>>> use of the detached state fields in order for the BlazeDS >>>> serialization to work properly. >>>> >>>> -jmh >>>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 4:26 AM, Jean-Baptiste BRIAUD -- >>>> Novlog<j-b.bri...@novlog.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Jason, >>>>> >>>>> How are you enhancing your POJOs ? >>>>> If you are not enhancing them at build time, please do it and give us >>>>> some >>>>> news. >>>>> >>>>> On Aug 21, 2009, at 05:38 , jason.m.hanna wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi All, >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm having some trouble with my OpenJPA application and could use some >>>>>> help. >>>>>> >>>>>> I've got a web-based application using Flex and BlazeDS to front-end >>>>>> my >>>>>> web >>>>>> container running Tomcat, Spring, OpenJPA, and a few other >>>>>> technologies. >>>>>> My >>>>>> back-end database is PostgreSQL. >>>>>> >>>>>> I've got a DAO layer that works with a number of annotated POJOs, and >>>>>> everything has been working fairly smoothly until I just tried to >>>>>> merge >>>>>> a >>>>>> detached object and set its Date (db timestamp) to null. >>>>>> >>>>>> Somewhat surprisingly, the new null value seems to go undetected by >>>>>> JPA >>>>>> and >>>>>> the field is never included in the generated update statement. Hence >>>>>> the >>>>>> date is not removed from my returned object. >>>>>> >>>>>> Because I'm using Flex and BlazeDS, my POJOs are annotated to disable >>>>>> detached state field use. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm running this way as the documentation seemed to suggest this >>>>>> should >>>>>> work >>>>>> w/o a detached state field - plus it avoids serialization issues in >>>>>> BlazeDS >>>>>> and ActionScript caused by the detached state field. >>>>>> >>>>>> Is this a bug I'm seeing or how the system is supposed to work? >>>>>> >>>>>> Versions, etc. as follows: >>>>>> OpenJPA 1.2.1 (classes enhanced @ build) >>>>>> JDK 1.6.x >>>>>> PostgreSQL 8.3 >>>>>> Tomcat 6.x >>>>>> Flex 3.3 >>>>>> >>>>>> Let me know if you need more info. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>> -jmh >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> View this message in context: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://n2.nabble.com/Issue-Merging-Object-w-Null-Timestamp-when-Detached-State-Field-Disabled-tp3484177p3484177.html >>>>>> Sent from the OpenJPA Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > >
