[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-405?page=comments#action_12427369 ] Craig Russell commented on JDO-405: -----------------------------------
> Only one value is needed for representing "no limit" and this was -1 with > "fetch-depth" (before the renaming) and is what 12.7.4 has (and would be > consistent with what values maxFetchDepth takes). I agree with Andy. Without looking at the document's history, it is inconsistent, and should be -1 to indicate no limit. > I would add that page 129 has an example that uses "fetch-depth" which was > removed/renamed, so this needs fixing. This has already been filed as a Change Log. See http://wiki.apache.org/jdo/ChangeLog > recursion-depth - fetching the whole graph with 0 or -1? > -------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: JDO-405 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-405 > Project: JDO > Issue Type: Bug > Affects Versions: JDO 2 final > Reporter: Ilan Kirsh > Fix For: JDO 2 maintenance release 1 > > > In page 124: "A value of -1 means that the recursion-depth is not limited by > traversing this field." > In page 127: "A recursion-depth of 0 will fetch the whole graph of instances > reachable from this field" > Is there a difference between these two? > In addition, I think that -1 / 0 as a default might be better than 1 it terms > of performance, because tracking such cycles has some overhead, which we > might not want to pay for most fields in which this feature is not needed > (and MaxFetchDepth is sufficient). -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
