juddi-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jeff Faath" <jfa...@apache.org>
Subject RE: UDDI v3 persistence
Date Fri, 12 Dec 2008 23:39:25 GMT
Sounds good to me then.  I don't foresee your changes causing any issues
other than the fact that I want to hold off on further development until you
finish so as not to have to redo anything.  Hopefully you're close to
completion?

 

From: Kurt T Stam [mailto:kurt.stam@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 5:08 PM
To: juddi-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: UDDI v3 persistence

 

Those objects will actually remain the same, the are the actual single
valued PKs. So I think this will work well.

Jeff Faath wrote: 

No, I'm talking about getting the BusinessEntity by the  business key. I was
figuring you were going to create these Long id fields for the main entities
but I could be wrong.  Are the "entity keys" still the primary keys for the
main entities?
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Kurt T Stam [mailto:kurt.stam@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 4:14 PM
To: juddi-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: UDDI v3 persistence
 
Are you talking about finding Addresses etc by using the BusinessEntity Key?
 
Jeff Faath wrote:
  

Now that I think about it, it does cause an inconvenience although it
    

seems
  

slight right now (let's hope it stays that way).  Anytime an entity is
retrieved or deleted, I was able to use the entity key directly to work
    

with
  

the object.  A lot of calls receive user input directly as keys (the
delete_xxx methods, get_xxx methods, etc) and there are many instances
    

where
  

I have to check for the existence of an entity.
 
I guess now instead of using the entity key directly in entityManager
    

calls,
  

I'll have to run a query to find the real ID based on the entity key.  I
don't see this as being a big deal now, but there's a lot of functionality
to re-work so I hope there are no snags.
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Kurt T Stam [mailto:kurt.stam@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 7:47 AM
To: juddi-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: UDDI v3 persistence
 
Hi guys,
 
I'm halfway into removing all the *Id.java classes from the persistence 
layer on the UDDI v3 branch, and it is making it all a lot cleaner. The 
reason they are there is b/c the way the PKs are setup in the UDDI v2 
schema. They are composite PK, however we can simplify the PKs to be of 
type Long.
 
Does anyone see any issues with this? Where we planning on using the 
parents business keys for fast searching or something? Are we afraid of 
running out of 'integers' in the ID columns?
 
Speak up or hold your peace forever ;).
 
--Kurt
 
 
  
    

 
 
 
  

 


Mime
View raw message