Mailing-List: contact jdo-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: jdo-dev@db.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (herse.apache.org: local policy)
From: Andy Jefferson <andy@jpox.org>
To: jdo-dev@db.apache.org,
 JDO Expert Group <jdo-experts-ext@sun.com>
Subject: Re: Rename property PersistenceUnitName to Name
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 08:54:42 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2
References: <99B66C55-F978-48B1-8021-8049D9CE7AAE@SUN.com>
 <200706060712.52540.andy@jpox.org>
 <70817C14-98E5-4520-B859-1E2933ADDF9F@SUN.com>
In-Reply-To: <70817C14-98E5-4520-B859-1E2933ADDF9F@SUN.com>
Organization: JPOX
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200706070854.42362.andy@jpox.org>

Hi Craig,

> This part of the use case was not in mind when I wrote the change
> request. The user asks for PMF by name "MyPMF" but then the
> PersistenceUnitName in MyPMF refers to a PersistenceUnit in the
> persistence.xml.
>
> Is that what JPOX does with the PersistenceUnitName today?

JPOX current behaviour :
If the user specifies a set of PMF properties and they include a=20
"persistenceUnitName" then JPOX will parse any persistence.xml (in the JPA=
=20
location(s)) for a persistence-unit of that name. With the persistence-unit=
=20
info it will take the properties specified in the persistence-unit and appe=
nd=20
on any others passed in to the PMF construction (in the same way as it is=20
done for an EMF with JPA). It will also internally load up the MetaData for=
=20
all classes specified by the persistence-unit (effectively removing the nee=
d=20
to discover metadata at runtime).

> > Or maybe you intend that an implementation supports both, and that
> > the same
> > name is used for both. But in that case how does the implementation
> > know
> > which it should go for ? What if a named PMF *and* a named
> > "persistence-unit"
> > exists for the supplied name - does "jdo.xml" take precedence over
> > "persistence.xml", or vice-versa?
>
> Good question. Perhaps there is room for both PersistenceUnitName and
> Name properties? The Name is used to match the user's
> getPersistenceManagerFactory(String name) and the PersistenceUnitName
> is used to match the persistence-unit name attribute in persistence.xml?

I think that's what I would prefer since while they represent very similar=
=20
concepts maybe there are differences in behaviour of the implementation if=
=20
its a persistence-unit, or if its a named PMF.


Regards
=2D-=20
Andy =A0(Java Persistent Objects - http://www.jpox.org)