don't think anyone is working on it
-- Juha
_
View thread online: http://main.jboss.org/thread.jsp?forum=66thread=10812
___
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Hunter Hillegas [EMAIL PROTECTED], Andrew Scherpbier
[EMAIL PROTECTED], JBoss Dev
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] EJB 2.0
I hear from Dain that the stuff is ready.
I am almost thinking of putting an alpha of RH out that includes the
classloaders, the sars, the EJB2.0 stuff
: RE: [JBoss-dev] EJB 2.0?
|
|
|I want to get more people playing with the Clustering stuff too.
|
|bill
|
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
| Hunter Hillegas
| Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 2:32 PM
| To: marc fleury; Andrew Scherpbier
Comments below...
Got it now ... but it is still not seeing eye to eye ... comments below ..
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
Dave,
We still don't see eye-to-eye, and I think I made the problem worse with
my
example.
I think the most common type of relationship will be something like 'a
cd
Got it now ... but it is still not seeing eye to eye ... comments below ..
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
Dave,
We still don't see eye-to-eye, and I think I made the problem worse with my
example.
I think the most common type of relationship will be something like 'a cd
has an artist' or 'a cd
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
Dave,
After reviewing these comments I think we are making this way more
complicated than it has to be. As far as I am concerned we should only
need the relationship stuff in jbosscmp-jdbc.xml for relationships that
use a relation table (ex. self relation
Sorry if this is posted twice!
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
Dave,
After reviewing these comments I think we are making this way more
complicated than it has to be. As far as I am concerned we should only
need the relationship stuff in jbosscmp-jdbc.xml for relationships that
use a relation
Dave,
We still don't see eye-to-eye, and I think I made the problem worse with my
example.
I think the most common type of relationship will be something like 'a cd
has an artist' or 'a cd has a publisher.' In this cases, the foreign key
for the artist or publisher would be just another
|I still believe there is overkill for the simple cases
|
|which will be the majority of cases. This is something that many
hmmm I am a cretin when it comes to db stuff but anything that makes the
lives of *most* people better as opposed to the lives of everyone blah is a
good thing. Never
Dave,
Ok, I see the misunderstanding now. I thought you were talking about the
jbosscmp-jdbc.xml file and you were talking about the ejb-jar.xml file. You
are correct in that a single relation can only have one cmr field on each
side of the relationship. From my perspective these are object
I am playing with the current sources and testing a 1 to many
relationship. I have the following two tables
order with pk: int objectid
ok
and
orderdetail
pk: int order_oid,int line_num
Does order detail have a compund key using both order_oid and line_num?
The link..
If you're within the same transaction, you should be ok I guess.
Bill
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Vinay
Menon
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 11:37 AM
To: Dev @ JBoss
Subject: [JBoss-dev] EJB 2.0 Locking for CMR
Hello,
go ahead..
-- Juha
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001, Vincent Harcq wrote:
Hi,
Does it bother anybody if I add a LocalResolver of DTD for //Sun
Microsystems, Inc.//DTD Enterprise JavaBeans 2.0//EN
to a local version of http://java.sun.com/dtd/ejb-jar_2_0.dtd ?
Vincent.
/27/01 10:50 PM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] EJB 2.0 Spec PD2
Hahahahahahahahaha!
OK, so I hope your right, but it seems these guys have too much money on
the line to allow a stable spec that aids competition.
I'm completely disgusted with that entire process.
Jim
--On Friday, April 27
Hahahahahahahahaha!
OK, so I hope your right, but it seems these guys have too much money on
the line to allow a stable spec that aids competition.
I'm completely disgusted with that entire process.
Jim
--On Friday, April 27, 2001 11:24 AM -0400 Jay Walters
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So
15 matches
Mail list logo
