Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ignite.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@ignite.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 15:39:11 +0700
Message-ID: 
 <CALH+G9qVvfM4PU+GTQ9mSNAB1z8WqEGC9W3FOzOiF2_WtQHyZA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: @QuerySqlField is incompatible in ignite 1.5 with 1.4 when set on
 method
From: Alexey Kuznetsov <akuznetsov@gridgain.com>
To: dev@ignite.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114086c49bc53f05254546fa

--001a114086c49bc53f05254546fa
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Igniters,

I have such class in ignite-1.4

class Test(
    @Id @ScalaCacheQuerySqlField(index = true) val id: Long = 0L,
    val name: String = null,
    aStatus: ListStatus,
    val ruleID: Long = 0L) extends Serializable {
    private val intStatus = enumToByte(aStatus)

    @ScalaCacheQuerySqlField(index = true) def status: ListStatus =
        byteToEnum(ListStatus.values, intStatus)
}

As part of my tests of upcoming ignite 1.5 I run my code and get exception
like this:

Caused by: class org.apache.ignite.IgniteCheckedException: Failed to
initialize property 'status' for key class 'class java.lang.Long'
 and value class 'class my.tester.sql.Test'. Make sure that one of these
classes contains respective getter method or field.
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.query.GridQueryProcessor.buildClassProperty(GridQueryProcessor.java:1512)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.query.GridQueryProcessor.processClassMeta(GridQueryProcessor.java:1393)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.query.GridQueryProcessor.initializeCache(GridQueryProcessor.java:241)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.query.GridQueryProcessor.onCacheStart(GridQueryProcessor.java:374)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheProcessor.startCache(GridCacheProcessor.java:1015)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheProcessor.onKernalStart(GridCacheProcessor.java:786)

After some debug I found that GridQueryProcessor tries to find method with
"get", but I have method without "get" in name.

I think we should add support for such use case, when user declare
getters/setters without using "get/set" prefixes.

Thoughts?

-- 
Alexey Kuznetsov
GridGain Systems
www.gridgain.com

--001a114086c49bc53f05254546fa--