Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [eclipselink-dev] Minutes: Functional Discussion - Ordered Lists
Are you saying that two rows in the db with order values 0 and 2 should be read as a list of 3 elements with null in the middle?
----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Keith" <MICHAEL.KEITH@xxxxxxxxxx> To: "Dev mailing list for Eclipse Persistence Services" <eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> 
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 4:31 PM
Subject: RE: [eclipselink-dev] Minutes: Functional Discussion - Ordered Lists 


Sorry, couldn't be at the meeting.

One case that I wanted to mention is the null value case.
For example:

List l = new ArrayList();
l.add(obj1);
l.add(obj2);
l.add(obj3);
...
l.set(1, null);

causes the order of obj1 to be 0 abd obj3 to be 2.
When re-read the list would be (obj1, null, obj3).

More comments below...


-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Krogh
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 2:45 PM
To: eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eclipselink-dev] Minutes: Functional Discussion - Ordered
Lists


Minutes:

Open Issues:

1.3.2.1 Non Contiguous Index values
 Resolution:
  include the expected index in the where clause.  If the
update fails, assume that the list is non-contiguous.
Re-index the list.


Could it also be a list manipulation collision and be the
equivalent of an optimistic lock exception?


1.3.2.2 Indexing new elements in un-instantiated IndirectLists
 Resolution: Don't support un-instantiated IndirectLists with
Ordered List.

1.3.2.3 OrderColumn table
 Resolution:
  One to Many: support OrderColumn on any Target table
  Join Table: only support OrderColumn on Join Table
  Throw an exception if any other table is specified.


Okay.


1.3.2.4 Duplicate support
 Resolution:
  Looking into Duplicates now.
  Will determine impact of supporting Duplicates as further
prototyping is done.
  Duplicates with Private Owned an issue.


Spec does not enumerate the duplicates issue.


1.3.2.5 "Two-way" order support
 Employee.projects and Projects.employees; say add ORDER_EMP
and ORDER_PROJ fields to the join table?
 Resolution:
  We are not at this time supporting a different ordering on
2 mappings sharing the same join table (one being read only).


Spec is silent on having ordered Lists on both sides of an m-m.
Might be worth mentioning in the spec, though.


1.3.2.6 Constraints in the DB - is that possible?
 Resolution:
  Log a Doc Bug: can't make index column part of the PK.

1.3.2.7 Target optimistic locking
 Resolution:
  Only uni-directional, use the flags that already exist on
the Mapping.
  Move the flags to OneToMany.

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Krogh
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 9:11 AM
To: eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Functional Discussion - Ordered Lists


We will use the call in information described here:
http://wiki.eclipse.org/EclipseLink/Development/DevMeetings

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Krogh
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 3:39 PM
To: eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Functional Discussion - Ordered Lists



I propose that we have a dicussion on the functional
direction of Ordered Lists.

A doc with open issues is here:

http://wiki.eclipse.org/EclipseLink/Development/JPA_2.0/ordered_lists


Monday: Mar 9th 2009
Time:  1:00pm est
Required: Doug Clarke, Shaun Smith, Andrei Ilitchev, Gordon
Yorke, Mike Keith

Peter Krogh
_______________________________________________
eclipselink-dev mailing list
eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev


_______________________________________________
eclipselink-dev mailing list
eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev

Back to the top