Hi Ilan,
I agree that mappedBy should remain in Field. Same is true for indexed,
unique, deleteAction, sequence and valueStrategy, which can all be
useful also for object databases. I think that only table, column and
columns are specific for relational databases. Same is applied also for
Element, Key and Value, which were moved to orm.
Thanks. I wasn't aware of whether you would use those concepts so just
moved
everything :-)
indexed and unique are certainly being used - also in Element, Key
and Value. I do not use deleteAction, sequence and valueStrategy
yet, but I think that it might make sense to use them in the future.
I am not sure how a composite index should be declared using
annotations. Assuming that this is done using index and unique -
these two are also relevant to object databases.
Presumably in MetaData you would do this ?
<class ...>
<index name="...">
<field name="a"/>
<field name="b"/>
</index>
</class>
Yes, this way exactly.
so I would guess that we should allow something like
@Index (fields={"a", "b"})
i.e add a fields array element onto Index (same for Unique).
We also need to add an @Indices annotation to allow for multiple indices
per
class - same for unique.
--
Andy
That looks good except that personally I prefer @indexes over @indices.
I just found an interesting discussion about this issue, at:
http://fraserspeirs.livejournal.com/1000062.html
Maybe both can be supported but because this is your work, I assume you
have the privilege to choose your favorite form :-)
Regards,
Ilan
