[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1784?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12637177#action_12637177
]
clombart edited comment on JCR-1784 at 10/6/08 12:12 PM:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Your patch seems good but I'm wondering why you have modified the class
AbstractMapperImpl ( see [1]).
It works without this modification and we can leave the code as it is (throw an
exception is there is no descriptor).
Are you agree if we don't modify this class ?
[1] Index:
src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/ocm/mapper/impl/AbstractMapperImpl.java
===================================================================
--- src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/ocm/mapper/impl/AbstractMapperImpl.java
(revision 701632)
+++ src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/ocm/mapper/impl/AbstractMapperImpl.java
(working copy)
@@ -200,7 +200,7 @@
public ClassDescriptor getClassDescriptorByClass(Class clazz) {
ClassDescriptor descriptor =
mappingDescriptor.getClassDescriptorByName(clazz.getName());
if (descriptor==null) {
- throw new IncorrectPersistentClassException("Class of
type: " + clazz.getName() + " has no descriptor.");
+ //throw new IncorrectPersistentClassException("Class of
type: " + clazz.getName() + " has no descriptor.");
}
return descriptor ;
}
was (Author: clombart):
Your patch seems good but I'm wondering why you have modified the class
AbstractMapperImpl ( see [1]).
It works without this modification and we can leave the code as it is (throw an
exception is there is no descriptor).
Are you agree if we don't modify this class ?
[1] Index:
src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/ocm/mapper/impl/AbstractMapperImpl.java
===================================================================
--- src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/ocm/mapper/impl/AbstractMapperImpl.java
(revision 701632)
+++ src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/ocm/mapper/impl/AbstractMapperImpl.java
(working copy)
@@ -200,7 +200,7 @@
public ClassDescriptor getClassDescriptorByClass(Class clazz) {
ClassDescriptor descriptor =
mappingDescriptor.getClassDescriptorByName(clazz.getName());
if (descriptor==null) {
- throw new IncorrectPersistentClassException("Class of
type: " + clazz.getName() + " has no descriptor.");
+ //throw new IncorrectPersistentClassException("Class of
type: " + clazz.getName() + " has no descriptor.");
}
return descriptor ;
}
Index:
src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/ocm/mapper/impl/AbstractMapperImpl.java
===================================================================
--- src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/ocm/mapper/impl/AbstractMapperImpl.java
(revision 701632)
+++ src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/ocm/mapper/impl/AbstractMapperImpl.java
(working copy)
@@ -200,7 +200,7 @@
public ClassDescriptor getClassDescriptorByClass(Class clazz) {
ClassDescriptor descriptor =
mappingDescriptor.getClassDescriptorByName(clazz.getName());
if (descriptor==null) {
- throw new IncorrectPersistentClassException("Class of
type: " + clazz.getName() + " has no descriptor.");
+ //throw new IncorrectPersistentClassException("Class of
type: " + clazz.getName() + " has no descriptor.");
}
return descriptor ;
}
> OCM:The UUID of the collection elements changes on update.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JCR-1784
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1784
> Project: Jackrabbit
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: jackrabbit-ocm
> Affects Versions: 1.5
> Reporter: Boni Gopalan
> Assignee: Christophe Lombart
> Fix For: 1.5
>
> Attachments: JCR-1784.bonigopalan.patch
>
> Original Estimate: 3h
> Remaining Estimate: 3h
>
> On ocm.update transaction, the Current implementation of
> DefaultCollectionConverterImpl recreates the colleciton-element nodes if
> there is no id field specificaiton. This is completely valid for majority of
> the cases. But I came across a case where the colleciton element has a uuid
> field. In this case also what is happening with the current implementation
> is that it drops all the elements from the old collection-elements and
> recreates the new ones. The major flip side is that now I am left with brand
> new UUIDs. I think we should address the uniqueness characteristics
> specified through UUID also while mapping colleciton elements.
> I have a patch and a TestCase to verify the same. I have implemented it only
> for the digester. If people feel the approach is right I will work out an
> annotation based testcase as well. I do not think it is going to fail even
> with annotations.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
