openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Michael Vorburger (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Created: (OPENJPA-701) Ability for fine-grained configuration of exclusion of foreign key columns in FetchPlan
Date Mon, 25 Aug 2008 09:31:44 GMT
Ability for fine-grained configuration of exclusion of foreign key columns in FetchPlan

                 Key: OPENJPA-701
             Project: OpenJPA
          Issue Type: Improvement
          Components: jdbc, sql
    Affects Versions: 1.1.0
            Reporter: Michael Vorburger
            Priority: Minor

Currently (v1.1.0), "Even when a direct relation is not eagerly fetched, OpenJPA selects the
foreign key columns and caches the values. This way when you do traverse the relation, OpenJPA
can often find the related object in its cache, or at least avoid joins when loading the related
object from the database. " (

In a domain model with "wide" classes that have lot's of associations = foreign key columns
on some tables, under a use case where you KNOW that you will not traverse some relations
(because you know you'll only access 1-2 of many, configured by some upper layer, other getters
may not even be available to end-code), it would be nice if the FetchPlan API was extended
to allow for more fine-grained configuration of exclusion / inclusion of foreign key columns.

Design proposal, just an idea, could certainly be implemented differently: For backward compatibility,
the current behaviour would likely have to stay as is. In addition however, a new method named
e.g. FetchPlan.doNotIncludeAllForeignKeyColumns() [or a more suitable shorter name... :)]
would cause the plan NOT to select any foreign key column by default. Only FK columns that
were explicitly added via addField() would then be selected; if no fields in the referenced
class are specified via another addField, then only the originating PK column would be included,
if any field in the referenced class are also specified, then the JOIN would happen (as today
- or would this simple API not suffice?). -- Minor: Ideally, an addField() for the association
and another addField() for only the ID/PK attribute of the related class should not lead to
a SQL JOIN either, as the ID/PK is in the original table of course, even if in the object
model it's an attribute of the related class.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message