cayenne-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emile Salem <esa...@polyprotec.com>
Subject Re: V3.0.2 org.apache.cayenne.access.DataDomain, line 258
Date Thu, 16 Jan 2014 14:04:09 GMT
Thanks for the quick answer.

The reason we chose 3.0 over 3.1 is we didn’t want to use a beta version in our production
environment. Because we’re scared of that word, "Beta".

No problem with the code mentioned, I gave it a dataContextFactory that behaves like default.
I was just curious as to why I should be forced to use a dataContextFactory in order to get
my queryCacheFactory accepted, I thought I might be missing something.

How far is 3.1 from becoming stable?

Le 2014-01-16 à 02:05, Andrus Adamchik <andrus@objectstyle.org> a écrit :

> Hi Émile,
> 
> Welcome to the community!
> 
> Looks suspect to me too :) The good news is that 3.0 is ancient news and these days stack
initialization is handled via dependency injection and more or less completely outside of
the stack objects themselves.
> 
> Not sure if that code is causing you any trouble (if so, let’s discuss), but in general
I would recommend switching to 3.1 beta for your work.
> 
> Andrus
> 
> 
> On Jan 15, 2014, at 8:05 PM, Emile Salem <esalem@polyprotec.com> wrote:
>> Hi there,
>> 
>> as a first post to this list, I’d like to ask the following:
>> why does the DataDomain need to have a dataContextFactory declared in 
>> its properties for the assignment of its queryCacheFactory to take place, as read
on line 258 of org.apache.cayenne.access.DataDomain (3.0.2):
>> 
>> if ((queryCacheFactoryName != null) && (dataContextFactory != null) &&
(!Util.isEmptyString(dataContextFactory))){
>>   this.queryCacheFactory = ((QueryCacheFactory)createInstance(queryCacheFactoryName,
QueryCacheFactory.class));
>> }
>> else{
>>   this.queryCacheFactory = null;
>> }
>> Thanks for your time
>> 
>> ÉMILE SALEM
>> Software Developer
>> esalem@polyprotec.com


Mime
View raw message