geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gianny Damour <gianny.dam...@optusnet.com.au>
Subject Re: CMP Field Mapping Required?
Date Sat, 02 Jul 2005 05:00:07 GMT
+1

Also, I think that we need to clearly display a warning message when an 
implicit mapping is infered.

I also think that the underlying database schema should be automatically 
created upon deployment, if explicitely requested. And a standalone tool 
should be provided to generate a DML script.

Thanks,
Gianny

On 2/07/2005 4:39 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:

>	It looks like our intention is that cmp-field-mappings are
>required in openejb-jar.xml.  That is, a single schema sequence contains
>the table name and one or more cmp-field-mappings, which kind of implies
>that you can't leave out the cmp-field-mappings, though of course there's
>no way for us to force you (via the schema) to include one for each CMP
>field in ejb-jar.xml.  Also, we do currently throw a deployment error if
>you forget a field.
>
>	But I wonder whether this is all necessary.  We could just default
>the column name to the CMP field name, so you would only need to provide
>the mapping if they were different.  Likewise, we could default the table
>name to the ejb-name and make that optional too.
>
>	What does everyone think about allowing defaults like that?  I
>think it would be handy for trivial demos/examples, and unlikely to be
>used for real apps.  All else being equal, I'm happy to support easy 
>examples.  But I'm not sure if people feel like explicit deployment errors 
>would be better than using defaults if you try to map everything but 
>forget one.
>
>Aaron
>
>  
>


Mime
View raw message