Jérémy, You can keep a cache of the results inside your EO. As the EO is specific to an EOEditingContext, it will be refreshed often if you use the pattern of creating a new EOEditingContext per main WOComponent.
BTW, the toMany is triggered by the fact we ask EOF to update the reverse relationships. By using an EO in a toOne, we add this EO to the reverse toMany, to add an object to an array, this array needs to exists. Samuel > Le 5 juin 2016 à 18:49, Jérémy DE ROYER <jeremy.dero...@ingencys.net> a écrit > : > > I tried this way last week but if it's faster when saving, it is much slower > when reading because it fetches each time without caching... > > The reading performances are really good but I have to find a way to speed up > when inserting new objects that "overuse" the database and slow down the > other users > > Jeremy > > Le 6 juin 2016 à 00:33, Chuck Hill <ch...@gevityinc.com > <mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>> a écrit : > >> That is what I meant by fetching. You need to re-implement those methods. >> Change it to do an fetch on Customer where modeTransport == this >> >> You can still use it to fetch a ModeTransport based on “listOrder contains >> order”. >> Chuck >> >> >> From: Jérémy DE ROYER <jeremy.dero...@ingencys.net >> <mailto:jeremy.dero...@ingencys.net>> >> Date: Sunday, June 5, 2016 at 3:26 PM >> To: Chuck Hill <ch...@gevityinc.com <mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>> >> Cc: WebObjects-Dev <webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com >> <mailto:webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>> >> Subject: Re: How to avoid expensive fetches in database when setting >> to-one-relationship >> >> What do you mean with « you can still use it for fetching » ? >> >> I removed the class property for the Customer to Order (but keeped the « >> listOrder » relationship) >> >> When I set the customer to the order, it runs fast. >> >> But when I retrieve the orders using the method below : >> >> public NSArray<Customer> listOrder() { >> return (NSArray<Customer>)storedValueForKey("listOrder"); >> } >> >> I get an error : >> >> <com.webobjects.foundation.NSKeyValueCoding$UnknownKeyException message >> ‘<Customer 0x72c7423b> valueForKey(): lookup of unknown key: 'listOrder'. >> This class does not have an instance variable of the name listOrder or >> _listOrder, nor a method of the name listOrder _listOrder, getListOrder, or >> _getListOrder' object ‘{...}' key 'listOrder'> >> at >> com.webobjects.foundation.NSKeyValueCoding$DefaultImplementation.handleQueryWithUnboundKey(NSKeyValueCoding.java:1377) >> at >> com.webobjects.eocontrol.EOCustomObject.handleQueryWithUnboundKey(EOCustomObject.java:1545) >> at >> com.webobjects.foundation.NSKeyValueCoding$Utility.handleQueryWithUnboundKey(NSKeyValueCoding.java:494) >> at >> com.webobjects.foundation.NSKeyValueCoding$_KeyBinding.valueInObject(NSKeyValueCoding.java:894) >> at >> com.webobjects.eocontrol.EOCustomObject.storedValueForKey(EOCustomObject.java:1634) >> at Customer.listeOrder(_Customer.java:890) >> >> Where am I wrong ? >> >> Jérémy >> >> Le 5 juin 2016 à 22:04, Chuck Hill <ch...@gevityinc.com >> <mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>> a écrit : >> >> Remove the “class property” setting for the ModeTransport to Order. You can >> still use it for fetching. >> >> Chuck >> >> >> From: <webobjects-dev-bounces+chill=gevityinc....@lists.apple.com >> <mailto:webobjects-dev-bounces+chill=gevityinc....@lists.apple.com>> on >> behalf of Jérémy DE ROYER <jeremy.dero...@ingencys.net >> <mailto:jeremy.dero...@ingencys.net>> >> Date: Sunday, June 5, 2016 at 12:55 PM >> To: WebObjects-Dev <webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com >> <mailto:webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>> >> Subject: How to avoid expensive fetches in database when setting >> to-one-relationship >> >> Dear all, >> >> In our app, we have a one to many relationship between order and mode >> transport >> >> For each order, we set the mode transport using the method below : >> >> >> public void setModeTransportRelationship(ModeTransport value) { >> if (_CommandeClient.LOG.isDebugEnabled()) { >> _CommandeClient.LOG.debug("updating modeTransport from " + >> modeTransport() + " to " + value); >> } >> if (value == null) { >> ModeTransport oldValue = modeTransport(); >> if (oldValue != null) { >> removeObjectFromBothSidesOfRelationshipWithKey(oldValue, >> "modeTransport"); >> } >> } else { >> addObjectToBothSidesOfRelationshipWithKey(value, "modeTransport"); >> } >> } >> >> >> Then, an objectWillChange() is fired for the mode transport… but the (not >> wished) consequence is that every to many relationships from the mode >> transport are fetched (even if we don’t call the associated method for the >> mode transport). However, the objects associated with the to one >> relationships are not fetched. >> >> We observed the same behavior for the customer object when using the >> setCustomerRelationship method of the ordre. The (bigger) problem is that >> the customer object has dozen of to many relationships... fetched for >> nothing… >> >> At the beginning we had few orders but now, we have to wait from 10 to 30 >> seconds until de saveChange is ended and that’s really not effective. More >> than 90 % of this time is spent for fetching the to many relationship >> whereas we just had to save the order values... >> >> Any idea how to deal with theses not-wished-fetches ? >> >> Jérémy >> > _______________________________________________ > Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. > Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) > Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: > https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/samuel%40samkar.com > > This email sent to sam...@samkar.com
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
