Hi Christopher, I haven't verified this is the case, but it looks likely - the testcase for OPENJPA-843 passes when I use the enhancer.
It may also be worth noting that we recently changed the default option for RuntimeUnenhancedClasses from supported to unsupported in OPENJPA-651. The change affects trunk and 1.3 (IIRC) and was done to try and prevent users from falling into situations like this one where the unenhanced classes don't work properly. -mike On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 6:49 PM, Christopher Gardner < chris.r.gard...@gmail.com> wrote: > So if you don't use the PCEnhancer, the full object graph will be updated? > Ouch! > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 6:18 PM, Christopher Gardner < > chris.r.gard...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I'm not enhancing the classes in any way. BTW, I'm running outside of a > > JEE container. > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 5:40 PM, Michael Dick <michael.d.d...@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > >> > >> That's embarrassing - it's right in the subject.. > >> > >> By any chance are you using RuntimeUnenhancedClasses (if you're running > >> the > >> PCEnhancer then you're not and it _should_ all work). If you are then > >> trying > >> runtime enhancement might help. > >> > >> Sorry for missing the subject earlier. > >> > >> -mike > >> > >> > >> Christopher Gardner wrote: > >> > > >> > 1.2.1 > >> > > >> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Michael Dick > >> > <michael.d.d...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> > > >> >> > >> >> Which version of OpenJPA are you using? > >> >> > >> >> This sounds like http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-843 > >> >> OPENJPA-843 . > >> >> > >> >> -mike > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Christopher Gardner wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > No matter what value I set cascade to, the update statement > prevails. > >> >> > Here > >> >> > is the last setting. I've tried every value. > >> >> > class A { > >> >> > @ManyToOne(optional = false, cascade = CascadeType.REMOVE) > >> >> > @JoinColumn(name > >> >> > = "b_id") > >> >> > private B b; > >> >> > } > >> >> > > >> >> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Christopher Gardner < > >> >> > chris.r.gard...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> What value of the cascade type do you set? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 4:42 PM, C N Davies <c...@cndavies.com> > >> wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >>> I just set cascade type on the field that I don't update but want > >> the > >> >> >>> join > >> >> >>> to be persisted. > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- > >> >> >>> From: Christopher Gardner [mailto:chris.r.gard...@gmail.com] > >> >> >>> Sent: Saturday, 22 August 2009 3:25 AM > >> >> >>> To: users@openjpa.apache.org > >> >> >>> Subject: Superfluous Updates for a @ManyToOne in OpenJPA 1.2.1 > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> Class A has a unidirectional many-to-one relationship with Class > B. > >> >> I > >> >> >>> change a property on a Class A object and persist the object. > The > >> >> log > >> >> >>> shows > >> >> >>> SQL update statements called for both A and B. I have no cascade > >> >> >>> options > >> >> >>> set on A's @ManyToOne. I do not want any updates to B because > it's > >> >> not > >> >> >>> logical to do so and it's inefficient. B represents standard, > >> >> >>> boilerplate > >> >> >>> data for many A's. Also, it adds no value for B to know about A. > >> No > >> >> >>> update > >> >> >>> is appropriate in this context. How do I stop updates to B? > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> View this message in context: > >> >> > >> > http://n2.nabble.com/Superfluous-Updates-for-a-ManyToOne-in-OpenJPA-1-2-1-tp3492419p3492691.html > >> >> Sent from the OpenJPA Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > >> -- > >> View this message in context: > >> > http://n2.nabble.com/Superfluous-Updates-for-a-ManyToOne-in-OpenJPA-1-2-1-tp3492419p3492745.html > >> Sent from the OpenJPA Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >> > > > > >
