Vlada,
If we look at the EJB specification, it states:
"9.4.7.1 Primary key that maps to a single field in the entity bean class
"The Bean Provider uses the <primkey-field> element of the deployment
descriptor to specify the container-managed field of the entity bean
class that contains the primary key. The field's type must be the
primary key type.
"9.4.7.2 Primary key that maps to multiple fields in the entity bean class
"<etc.>"
I read this as follows:
"If I have a primary key with a single field, use the <primkey-field>
mechanism, if not, don't."
This, to me, indicates that using a FooPK to contain a single "int"
or "Integer" is invalid. (Maybe not illegal, but certainly not
the correct way to do things: e.g., deprecated.) If this is not
the intent of the spec., I would suggest rewording it to indicate
that there are actually two ways to map a primary key with a single
field.
Also, what of my suggestion to permit "int" as a primary key type.
As noted previously, this is a very reasonable PK type, due to
it's inherent non-nullness.
-jkw
Vlada Matena wrote:
>
> The primary key class MyPK defined below is legal in EJB 1.1. However,
> the "value" field must be defined as "public" in the class.
>
> Vlada
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Evan Ireland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2000 3:25 PM
> Subject: Re: EJB spec does not permit numbers as primary keys
>
> > "Jonathan K. Weedon" wrote:
> > >
> > > c) Primary Key wrapper classes for single field primary
> > > keys are deprecated in EJB 1.1. This precludes using a
> > > class FooPK as a primary key type.
> >
> > If this is deprecated (although I can see no evidence of it myself) then it
> > is a big mistake.
> >
> > I suspect that it is not deprecated. I would recommend the following pattern
> > for numeric primary keys:
> >
> > public class MyPK
> > {
> > int value;
> >
> > MyPK() { ... }
> >
> > // hashCode and equals ...
> > }
> >
> > This is preferable to using java.lang.Integer as a primary key type as it gives
> > you better type safety (you can't accidentally pass an AccountKey where a
> > CustomerKey is expected).
> >
> > <vendor>
> > We also permit entity components to have non-valuetype primary keys in our
> > product, but the mechanism is proprietary and so we leave it undocumented.
> > </vendor>
> > ________________________________________________________________________________
> >
> > Evan Ireland Sybase EAServer Engineering [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Wellington, New Zealand +64 4 934-5856
> >
> > ===========================================================================
> > To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
> > of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
> >
> >
>
> ===========================================================================
> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
> of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
