Re: [eclipselink-users] most optimal wy to persisted list?

[James Sutherland <jamesssss@xxxxxxxxx>]

1.0.2 is the current release.

1.1 is not yet released, but should be soon, the release candidate was
released on Feb 4th.

http://www.eclipse.org/eclipselink/downloads/milestones.php

2.0 is a development stream, so won't be released for a while.



Phillip Ross-3 wrote:
> 
> 
> Thanks James.  I've been reading through all of the EclipseLink relational
> and JPA docs and trying to figure out the best way to do this.
> 
> Since the 1.0.2 build is the one downloadable from the eclipselink website
> I'm assuming 1.1 and 2.0 builds are not ready for primetime.  Or maybe the
> site wasnt updated and there actually is a 1.1 release I'm missing?  I
> have seem the eclipse wiki not being completely up-to-date in the past,
> but I usually see some announcement after a release somewhere.
> 
> Anyway, I think I'll have to go with the third method and define another
> intermediate class with an index field.  Luckily the requirements for this
> specific case do not require the exact semantics of an array list or
> anything that holds their exact index.  Just an ordered list I think will
> meet the requirements.
> 
> Thanks again
> - Phillip
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: James Sutherland <jamesssss@xxxxxxxxx>
>> To: eclipselink-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> Sent: Monday, March 2, 2009 9:57:19 AM
>> Subject: Re: [eclipselink-users] most optimal wy to persisted list?
>> 
>> 
>> JPA 2.0 and EclipseLink 2.0 will support ordered lists using an index
>> column
>> in the database.  BasicCollections will also be standardized as
>> ElementCollection mappings in JPA 2.0.  The EclipseLink 2.0 builds
>> already
>> have this functionality, and some of the functionality was in the 1.1
>> release.
>> 
>> The drawback with serializing is that you cannot query on the list
>> values. 
>> However, if you don't need to query the values, then there is probably
>> nothing wrong with serializing the list.
>> 
>> You can also map the list as a OneToMany in JPA 1.0, and define a class
>> for
>> the value that also contains an index field to order the list by.
>> 
>> 
>> Phillip Ross-3 wrote:
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Hi all...
>> > 
>> > I'm just wondering, for EclipseLink, what is the most optimal way to
>> > persist List fields of an entity.  The @BasicCollection does not
>> include
>> > persisting the index of the List elements (as far as I can tell) so
>> when
>> > the EntityManager is cleared or a new one which does not alreayd know
>> > about the in-memory version of the List is used... the index values are
>> > lost.  In the current implementation, there are lists being serialized
>> to
>> > byte arrays and stored as LOB columns which is not... optimal :)
>> > 
>> > Any advice on this?  Portability to other JPA providers is of little
>> > concern, if any.
>> > 
>> > Thanks!
>> > - Phillip
>> > 
> 


-----
---
http://wiki.eclipse.org/User:James.sutherland.oracle.com James Sutherland 
http://www.eclipse.org/eclipselink/
 EclipseLink ,  http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/ias/toplink/
TopLink 
Wiki:  http://wiki.eclipse.org/EclipseLink EclipseLink , 
http://wiki.oracle.com/page/TopLink TopLink 
Forums:  http://forums.oracle.com/forums/forum.jspa?forumID=48 TopLink , 
http://www.nabble.com/EclipseLink-f26430.html EclipseLink 
Book:  http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Java_Persistence Java Persistence 
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/most-optimal-wy-to-persisted-list--tp22229802p22309909.html
Sent from the EclipseLink - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.