[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-331?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Miroslav Nachev updated OPENJPA-331:
------------------------------------
Attachment: license-fix-OpenJPA-331-v110.patch
Is that OK?
I am so sorry but I am not so friendly with License matter. If this is not OK,
please fix it or exact tell me what to do.
> Allow BigInteger and other Basic types as Primary Keys
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OPENJPA-331
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-331
> Project: OpenJPA
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: kernel
> Affects Versions: 0.9.7, 1.0.0
> Reporter: Kevin Sutter
> Assignee: Kevin Sutter
> Fix For: 1.0.2, 1.1.0
>
> Attachments: fix-OpenJPA-331.patch, license-fix-OpenJPA-331-v110.patch
>
>
> Section 2.1.4 of the JPA spec outlines the requirements for a primary key
> (@Id):
> Section 2.1.4: A simple ( i.e., non-composite) primary key must correspond
> to a single persistent field or property of
> the entity class. The Id annotation is used to denote a simple primary key.
> See section 9.1.8.
> Also from Section 2.1.4 : The primary key (or field or property of a
> composite primary key) should be one of the following types:
> any Java primitive type; any primitive wrapper type; java.lang.String;
> java.util.Date;
> java.sql.Date. In general, however, approximate numeric types (e.g., floating
> point types) should
> never be used in primary keys. Entities whose primary keys use types other
> than these will not be portable.
> If generated primary keys are used, only integral types will be portable. If
> java.util.Date is
> used as a primary key field or property, the temporal type should be
> specified as DATE.
> Right now, we are treating the "should be" statement above as "must be" and
> only allowing the specified types as primary keys. But, the sentence in the
> middle of this paragraph ("Entities whose primary keys use types other than
> these will not be portable.") indicates that other types can also be allowed,
> but may not be portable.
> It seems that Glassfish allows these additional Basic types as primary keys.
> We should probably allow the same thing to keep up with the Jones'.
> This was discussed on dev mailing list.
> http://www.nabble.com/BigInteger-as-%40Id-tf4318071.html
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
