Stijn de Witt wrote:
We have developed a web application using OJB. All seems to work fine,
but after some hours of being deployed we run into a problem.
snip/
java.io.EOFException
at com.mysql.jdbc.MysqlIO.readFully(MysqlIO.java:1394)
snip/
I have seen a number of solutions mentioned:
1)
Armin,
I discovered that the default implementation of the CopyStrategy.read method
re-build the object based on the hashmap stored in the cache implementation.
That's cool, but the problem is the following:
When an object is retrieved from the cache, and you try to get one
of its reference or
Maksimenko Alexander wrote:
I have tree like structure (with parent,children relationships). I'm
using proxies to lazy materialize them. Everything works well but in
particular cases I have to materialize the whole tree because
folder.getChildren().get(0).getParent() is not the same as folder
Lemke, Wesley wrote:
Our problem occurs when we save a GenericGroup. It will first save the
ClientBillingInfo object, so it puts -1 in the generic_grp_id field of
the client_billing table (We are using database generated keys).
If I understand you correctly, your problem is that your DB will set
Hi David,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Armin,
I discovered that the default implementation of the CopyStrategy.read method
re-build the object based on the hashmap stored in the cache implementation.
That's cool, but the problem is the following:
When an object is retrieved from the cache, and you try
Stas Ostapenko wrote:
org.apache.commons.lang.SerializationException: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException
: Domain
So, java.lang.ClassNotFoundException occurs. But Domain.class is in
the same directory with test_copyOfGlobalRepository. class ! At
Jakob Braeuchi wrote:
i just comitted a patch (OJB 1.1) to solve this problem. please have a
look at it.
FYI: the setFetchSize hint is available in OJB_1_0_RELEASE branch
(as beta-status, with refactoring warning!) waiting to be merged
with the trunk.
Whenever I get a free timeslot I will look
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've always (in OJB ODMG) used
cascading delete bounded by appropriate auto-delete settings; now it looks
as if I have no choice but to delete each individual object by hand. True?
Setting the cascading delete settings by relationship type (1:1, 1:n,
m:n) seems
Hi Wes,
Lemke, Wesley wrote:
We have a 1-1 Relationship between GenericGroup and ClientBillingInfo.
We have the client_billing_id in the generic_group table and the
generic_grp_id in the client_billing table, because we need to traverse
this relationship in both directions.
Our problem occurs when
Hi Steve,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now I remember why I'm always hesitant to upgrade OJB - it seems like
there is some fundamental change to how things work.
we made a complete refactoring of the odmg implementation in 1.0.2/3,
because of the many known issues in OJB =1.0.1 (see release-notes
Martin Kalén wrote:
Maksimenko Alexander wrote:
I have tree like structure (with parent,children relationships). I'm
using proxies to lazy materialize them. Everything works well but in
particular cases I have to materialize the whole tree because
folder.getChildren().get(0).getParent() is not
Thanks. I did use an after insert type solution to update the field.
-Original Message-
From: Martin Kalén [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 3:56 AM
To: OJB Users List
Subject: Re: 1-1 Relationship Both ways
Lemke, Wesley wrote:
Our problem occurs when we save
Hello -
I am having some difficulty with extents - something that OJB should
handle nicely.
I have a Project class persisted in a table called PROJECTS.
I have a Person class persisted in a table called PEOPLE.
I have a PrimaryInvestigator class that extends Person.
The PrimaryInvestigator class
Hi !
Are you sure that Domain.class contains no package declaration in Java?
(As Armin already pointed out.)
Yes. here is Domain.java
public class Domain
{
public Integer Id;
public Integer Status;
public String Domain;
public String Comment;
public Domain(Integer Id,Integer Status,String
Hi,
strange!
Could you do another test to check common-lang serialization util:
Domain d = new Domain();
Object result = SerializationUtils.clone(d)
This call was used by MetadataManager.
regards,
Arnin
Stas Ostapenko wrote:
Hi !
Are you sure that Domain.class contains no package declaration in
What version of OJB are you using (1.0, 1.0.2?), and which type of cache are
you using? (ObjectCacheTwoLevel, ObjectCacheDefaultImpl)?
The issue stems from the fact that your proxy collection is being materialized
with 1) a different PersistneceBroker instance then the parent object, and 2)
I got the configuration right, so OJB is now using oscache, but OJB is
still updating objects that haven't changed.
In my test I create a new object, persist it, sleep for 5 seconds, and
then persist it again. The first store does an insert, and the second
store does an update. We have a
Martin Armin,
Thanks for the responses. Some more info:
- The collection in question is a non-decomposed m:n.
- There actually are two collections which exhibit this problem; in one
case the child pk is an int, and in the other it's a String. The keys are
not null or 0 (the child being
Hi Bobby,
Bobby Lawrence wrote:
Hello -
I am having some difficulty with extents - something that OJB should
handle nicely.
I have a Project class persisted in a table called PROJECTS.
I have a Person class persisted in a table called PEOPLE.
I have a PrimaryInvestigator class that extends
So, here is new code
public class Domain implements java.io.Serializable
{
public Integer Id;
public Integer Status;
public String Domain;
public String Comment;
public Domain(){};
public Domain(Integer Id,Integer Status,String Domain,String Comment)
{
this.Id = Id;
this.Status = Status;
We are using PB-api. I guess that is what happens when you assume :)
Thanks Armin.
-Original Message-
From: Armin Waibel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 10:52 AM
To: OJB Users List
Subject: Re: Which Object Cache am I using?
Hi Wes,
which API do you use?
The
Three more things:
1) I have ImplicitLocking turned off
2) My pseudocode is wrong: Actually, the parent object is created in a
different transaction. So it's like this:
tx = odmg.newTransaction();
profile = new FieldOfficeProfileImpl();
database.makePersistent(profile);
Armin -
What is the extends attribute of a class-descriptor for?
There is no documentation for this...
Armin Waibel wrote:
Hi Bobby,
Bobby Lawrence wrote:
Hello -
I am having some difficulty with extents - something that OJB should
handle nicely.
I have a Project class persisted in a table called
Bobby Lawrence wrote:
Armin -
What is the extends attribute of a class-descriptor for?
There is no documentation for this...
this attribute isn't used by OJB (I think this was added by a committer
some years ago, but never worked AFAIK).
regards
Armin
Armin Waibel wrote:
Hi Bobby,
Bobby Lawrence
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Three more things:
1) I have ImplicitLocking turned off
2) My pseudocode is wrong: Actually, the parent object is created in a
different transaction. So it's like this:
tx = odmg.newTransaction();
profile = new FieldOfficeProfileImpl();
Hi,
Do we have proper calssDecriminator (Mapping the all classes on the same
table.) mechanism without side effects in OJB, on the same lies of
Hibernate?
In the documentation is it just mentioned, but not sufficient details
and examples are gives on that
Regards,
Ramki
Sigh. Is it still Monday? I'll get it right eventually. Here is what is
(was) actually being done:
tx = odmg.newTransaction();
tx.begin();
profile = new FieldOfficeProfileImpl();
database.makePersistent(profile);
tx.commit();
tx = odmg.newTransaction();
Dear Ramakrishna,
We had this feature since 2001!
Please note that OJB is not based on lies !
for details refer to the documentation under
http://db.apache.org/ojb/docu/guides/advanced-technique.html#Mapping+All+Classes+on+the+Same+Table
cheers,
Thomas
Ramakrishna Reddy wrote:
Hi,
Do we have
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry for so much volume, but I spoke too soon.
The only thing that changes when I add tx.lock(county, tx.WRITE) is that
it does an update instead of an insert. In fact, it does this even if I
request a READ lock. So, in summary, this code:
tx =
Stas Ostapenko wrote:
So, here is new code
public class Domain implements java.io.Serializable
SerializationUtils needs Serializable classes by contract,
this should probably be better documented. Any suggestions
as to where in the docs/config files you would first look
for this? (So we could
30 matches
Mail list logo
