On Apr 27, 2005, at 8:40 AM, Michelle Caisse wrote:
Hi, Craig,
I'm not sure what you mean by map. Are you referring to Erik's email about using the implementation-classes extension? I can figure that out, I would think. I assume it would go into the jdo file and not the orm.
I was hoping (actually expecting) that the JPOX-specific stuff would be in the .orm file not the .jdo file. The .jdo file is supposed to be able to contain *just* the object model stuff, and no mapping information. And enumerating the classes that can implement the interface for the purpose of being able to map to the database seems like mapping information to me.
This stuff falls into the category of what changes are allowed to the TCK files in order to pass the tests. I'd like to think that the .jdo files are not touchable, but the .orm files are allowed to be changed. So adding vendor-specific stuff to .jdo doesn't appeal to me.
On another note, yesterday I collected more information on the OutOfMemoryError problem (http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-21). It seems that there are several different causes: some instances of not closing the pmf and some specific tests that gobble memory and don't return it when they complete.
If you know of specific cases where resources are not being closed or returned, these could be filed as individual JIRA bugs (assuming that it's easier to file a JIRA than just to fix it, using JDO-21 as the bug report to file it against).
Do you have someone else who can work on this or is it in my queue?
Anyone else on the alias who can help out here is welcome to do so. I really wish I had more people who were signed up...
Craig
-- MichelleCraig Russell
Craig Russell wrote:Hi Michelle,
Can you find out how to map the collections of interfaces that you are having trouble with?
Thanks,
Craig
Begin forwarded message:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: April 26, 2005 11:46:43 PM PDT
To: 'JDO Expert Group' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Collections of interfaces
??? JPOX supports it using the extension implementation-classes and
listing all implementations there.
Erik Bengtson
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 2:17 AM
To: JDO Expert Group
Subject: Collections of interfaces
Javadogs,
The JPOX team has pointed out that JDO doesn't require support for
Collections of interfaces as persistent field types.
Clearly, this was an oversight, as it was meant to be required and
there are actually TCK tests for it.
I'd like to correct the oversight in the JDO 2.0 spec.
So I need to know:
Are there any JDO implementations that do not support this? All
implementations that claimed to pass the TCK should have run into
this...
Thanks,
Craig
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
