db-jdo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig L Russell <Craig.Russ...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday, July 20, 9 am PDT
Date Sat, 21 Jul 2007 20:16:16 GMT
Hi Andy,

On Jul 21, 2007, at 10:48 AM, Andy Jefferson wrote:

> Hi Craig,
>
>> This brings up a question. In JPOX, if you enhance a class with a
>> field that is NotPersistent, can you then in an embedded use case
>> mark the same field as Persistent?
>
> The only situation I'd currently thought of (but never tried) would  
> be of
> not persisting a field that had been defined as persistent (not the  
> other
> way around). The JPOX Enhancer doesn't do anything special in this
> situation so if the user enhanced it as non-persistent and tried  
> that it
> would likely fail.
>
> I've certainly seen some situations where a particular class is  
> defined
> with a full persistence definition, but when stored embedded only a  
> subset
> of the fields are wanted to be persisted.
>
>> More questions than answers. Are we sure that it's a good idea to
>> allow overriding the PersistenceModifier in embedded usages?
>
> I'd like to allow the "downgrade" option (not persist a persistable  
> field)
> since it should be common enough when embedding. As you pointed  
> out, the
> "upgrade" option creates problems and would require special  
> treatment to
> allow it so I've no problem ruling it out.

Ok, I've restored PersistenceModifier and I'll put in some javadoc to  
indicate where it might productively be used.

Thanks,

Craig

> --
> Andy
> Java Persistent Objects (JPOX)
>

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