db-jdo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andy Jefferson <a...@datanucleus.org>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1148192 - /db/jdo/trunk/tck/src/conf/jdori-pmf.properties
Date Wed, 10 Aug 2011 04:20:47 GMT
> The intent of the "increment" strategy is to allow use of a database
> that the user has no control over (for example, the DBA refuses to add
> new tables). It's not an optimal strategy but a useful one. The JDO
> implementation can cache the largest key used and mitigate database
> access for each insert.
> But without changing the specification, I don't think it's ok to
> require another table in order to implement "increment". That's what
> "sequence" is for.
> Was there a recent change in DataNucleus that now "increment" is
> implemented using an internal "sequence" strategy?

DataNucleus simply changed to make use of the "autoCreate" flags in imposing 
whether it was allowed to create *any* schema components. It has ALWAYS used a 
table for "increment", that is not a change. "sequence" has always been to use 
a datastore sequence also.

DataNucleus (http://www.datanucleus.org)

View raw message