openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Patrick Linskey" <plins...@bea.com>
Subject RE: OPENJPA-182: reuse Connection constants or create our own?
Date Wed, 11 Apr 2007 00:34:43 GMT
As long as any given enum instance that corresponds to a
theoretically-unique enum value has internally-consistent state, we
should be in good shape. IOW, if the enum constructors are called
appropriately or internal state is otherwise maintained, then things
should work out fine.

-Patrick

-- 
Patrick Linskey
BEA Systems, Inc. 

_______________________________________________________________________
Notice:  This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
information  of  BEA Systems,  Inc.,  its subsidiaries  and  affiliated
entities,  that may be confidential,  proprietary,  copyrighted  and/or
legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
and have received this message in error, please immediately return this
by email and then delete it. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marina.Vatkina@Sun.COM [mailto:Marina.Vatkina@Sun.COM] 
> Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 4:56 PM
> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: OPENJPA-182: reuse Connection constants or 
> create our own?
> 
> It should be ok anyway in the same VM. Unfortunately I had 
> conflicting messages 
> on weather it's the name or the ordinal that is guaranteed to 
> work across the 
> VMs :(.
> 
> -marina
> 
> Patrick Linskey wrote:
> > Fascinating. Happily, as it turns out, we never compare these things
> > directly; instead, we extract a value from the enums and 
> use that. The
> > value is populated in the enum constructor:
> > 
> > public enum IsolationLevel {
> >     DEFAULT(-1),
> >     NONE(Connection.TRANSACTION_NONE),
> >     READ_UNCOMMITTED(Connection.TRANSACTION_READ_UNCOMMITTED),
> >     READ_COMMITTED(Connection.TRANSACTION_READ_COMMITTED),
> >     REPEATABLE_READ(Connection.TRANSACTION_REPEATABLE_READ),
> >     SERIALIZABLE(Connection.TRANSACTION_SERIALIZABLE);
> > 
> >     private final int _connectionConstant;
> > 
> >     private IsolationLevel(int connectionConstant) {
> >         _connectionConstant = connectionConstant;
> >     }
> > 
> >     protected int getConnectionConstant() {
> >         return _connectionConstant;
> >     }
> > }
> > 
> > Do you know if the getConnectionConstant() method would 
> return the same
> > value for different instances of the "same" module?
> > 
> > -Patrick
> > 
> 
> 

Notice:  This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information  of  BEA
Systems,  Inc.,  its subsidiaries  and  affiliated entities,  that may be confidential,  proprietary,
 copyrighted  and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received
this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.

Mime
View raw message