Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-openjpa-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 48015 invoked from network); 9 Apr 2010 13:28:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 9 Apr 2010 13:28:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 77425 invoked by uid 500); 9 Apr 2010 13:28:14 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-openjpa-dev-archive@openjpa.apache.org Received: (qmail 77373 invoked by uid 500); 9 Apr 2010 13:28:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@openjpa.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@openjpa.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@openjpa.apache.org Received: (qmail 77365 invoked by uid 99); 9 Apr 2010 13:28:13 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 13:28:13 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.4 required=10.0 tests=AWL,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_FRT_STOCK2,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of kwsutter@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.46 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.212.46] (HELO mail-vw0-f46.google.com) (209.85.212.46) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 13:28:07 +0000 Received: by vws18 with SMTP id 18so11853vws.33 for ; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 06:27:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:received:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=MAt/Toe+x2Cr1ZlVVB+shUErrHQ7UAriKQBI4wcih18=; b=NhZVRcvn1M845vdzyYYW5uVqKsf6jc+kM5A/dqcoPGcv8ekosjTMXtARnHo8nCSqFT aYrMmGRpBrTVMQZD530+jZd0SODCNCyLaTFWOhs2cvG0tX2mn2rKFAJ+WjxatPqwYWHe TX2EPmT5zqXVOVml+9SYdCLgYvR2qOylyGUoE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=oM+Rc2QhwLDtJDa6iiNJf2uXopAMBeN+hUd/gwpagkjqX3XHCGNVo52P0iF2oIdaCv MfHXhvH6DHgbRJJcCWj8kmfoXMxcLDAAdZYuLSc6ZUo/8RyHizX3Cjg4N8LvxvUiPo7Y J4g8E1FHDy3f1IUjSucO7ZsDZ6DRARuXPKtDk= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.75.196 with HTTP; Fri, 9 Apr 2010 06:27:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1127167746.587951269981987253.JavaMail.jira@brutus.apache.org> <560293077.19101270753656664.JavaMail.jira@brutus.apache.org> Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 08:27:45 -0500 Received: by 10.220.61.197 with SMTP id u5mr1116820vch.192.1270819666073; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 06:27:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [jira] Updated: (OPENJPA-1604) Setting PessimisticLockManager fails to append "for update clause" to the select statement From: Kevin Sutter To: dev@openjpa.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e0cb4e887cb7c5198a0483cdc27d --e0cb4e887cb7c5198a0483cdc27d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Rick, I agree. I don't like localizing trace messages either. Trace is supposed to be meant for us developers to help debug a problem. If it gets localized to say French, it's no good to me. But, this should be a whole separate thread on the dev forum... :-) Thanks, Kevin On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Rick Curtis wrote: > Albert - > > When I committed the code I changed the trace string to localized warning > messages, but this brings up a very good point. > > I know there is precedence for localizing trace messages, but does that > mean > it is the right thing to do? Personally, I like putting trace in my code so > I can actually figure out what is going on if I have to debug a problem > after the fact. Requiring a developer to localize all trace messages is a > burden and in turn reduces the likely hood that someone trace will end up > in > our code. As it is today, it is nearly impossible to fix most OpenJPA > problems on trace alone. Thoughts? ... I've been meaning to throw this one > out to the group for discussion. > > -- > Thanks, > Rick > > On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Albert Lee wrote: > > > Please localized the trace message. > > > > Thanks > > Albert Lee. > > > > On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Rick Curtis (JIRA) > > wrote: > > > > > > > > [ > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-1604?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel > > ] > > > > > > Rick Curtis updated OPENJPA-1604: > > > --------------------------------- > > > > > > Attachment: OPENJPA-1604-2.0.x.patch > > > OPENJPA-1604-trunk.patch > > > > > > > Setting PessimisticLockManager fails to append "for update clause" to > > the > > > select statement > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > Key: OPENJPA-1604 > > > > URL: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-1604 > > > > Project: OpenJPA > > > > Issue Type: Bug > > > > Affects Versions: 2.0.0, 2.1.0 > > > > Reporter: Fay Wang > > > > Assignee: Pinaki Poddar > > > > Fix For: 2.0.0, 2.1.0 > > > > > > > > Attachments: OPENJPA-1604-2.0.x.patch, > OPENJPA-1604-trunk.patch > > > > > > > > > > > > I ran a testcase against openjpa 1.2, and found that the "for > update" > > > clause is appended to the SQL when > > > > > value="pessimistic"/> > > > > is added to the persistence.xml without calling: > > > > q.setLockMode(LockModeType.PESSIMISTIC_WRITE); > > > > However, this behavior changes when running against trunk level code > > > > > > -- > > > This message is automatically generated by JIRA. > > > - > > > You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Albert Lee. > > > --e0cb4e887cb7c5198a0483cdc27d--