On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 2:44 PM Sanne Grinovero <sa...@hibernate.org> wrote:
> Sounds like a very interesting patch, I agree with you that there's > much potential. > Although Steve from your description it seems like you don't think it can > work? > Not sure I follow. You agree with the potential of the idea I am proposing, but then point out how I don't think it will work. I am confused :) I guess I think there are different shades of "it works". I mean heck "it works" as is already. I think it works *best* if there is no need to "translate" from one canonical form to another. In other words, if persisters and bytecode enhancements and dirty tracking all understood the same attribute indexes I think that is by far the optimal situation performance-wise. I would expect something among the lines of what Gunnar described to > be feasible: to let the persisters figure out the right numbers when > they are created (once only). But I am not familiar enough with this > code area to get in the details. > But that's not what Gunnar proposed. Its the same thing I asked him to clarify. He proposes the "other way"; have the enhancer define the order and the persisters pick it up from the enhancer. Could that work? I guess. Really I have no idea, so many unknowns there. About the method you mentioned " $$_hibernate_read_name()" : who > invokes that, and when is the code which invokes that method > generated? > I'm assuming that would be part of the persister, so it means > persister implementations are defined at runtime via bytecode > manipulation? > That is a method generated by the enhancer. Generally speaking it builds a reader/writer method pair for each "enhanceable" field. For readers, the name of the method follows the pattern "$$_hibernate_read_{fieldName}(). The callers of this method are all done via enhancement as well. _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev