db-jdo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig Russell <Craig.Russ...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Testing persistent interfaces
Date Mon, 05 Sep 2005 19:47:48 GMT
Hi Michael,

Thanks for the comments. A final code review is attached. I'll send  
the xml file updates as a separate review.
On Sep 5, 2005, at 9:39 AM, Michael Bouschen wrote:

> Hi Craig,
>
> I like the idea of using the xml bean factory instance pattern  
> instead of the static bean factory. I was not aware that I can add  
> a bean instance to the CompanyModelReader using an API such as  
> addSingleton instead of defining in xml. This solves the problem of  
> attaching the current pm to the company factory which is then used  
> by the CompanyModelReader when creating pc instances.
>
> A few remarks about the patch:
> - Today CompanyFactoryRegistry.registerFactory takes the name of  
> the company factory class as an argument. This means all the  
> callers need to get the value of the system property  
> jdo.tck.mapping.companyfactory and pass this to the call. Would it  
> make sense to add another method registerFactory taking just the PM:
>     public static final String companyFactoryClassName =
>         System.getProperty("jdo.tck.mapping.companyfactory");
>
>     public static void registerFactory(PersistenceManager pm) {
>         registerFactory(companyFactoryClassName, pm);
>     }
> This keeps the handling of the property  
> jdo.tck.mapping.companyfactory local in class CompanyFactoryRegistry.

Good.
>
> - Class CompanyModelReader should define a constant for the name of  
> the companyFactory bean in the xml:
>     public static final String COMPANY_FACTORY_BEAN =  
> "companyFactory";
> It is used in the addSingleton call in method configureFactory.

Right.
>
> - The patch includes a changed version of derby.property where you  
> uncommented the special Mac property for derby. I guess you are not  
> going to check in this change, correct?

Correct.

>
> Regards Michael
>
>
>> Javadogs,
>> Please check out the Wiki page http://wiki.apache.org/jdo/ 
>> PersistentInterfaces and this patch.
>> I've tested the companyNoRelationships.xml but haven't updated the  
>> other testdata files, pending a review. The idea is to replace the  
>> testdata xml files with the factory concept so they can be used by  
>> the standard CompletenessTest as well as the interface test.
>> Craig
>> =
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>> ---
>> Craig Russell
>> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/ 
>> jdo
>> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Michael Bouschen        Tech@Spree Engineering GmbH
> mailto:mbo.tech@spree.de    http://www.tech.spree.de/
> Tel.:++49/30/235 520-33        Buelowstr. 66
> Fax.:++49/30/2175 2012        D-10783 Berlin
>

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!


Mime
View raw message