Thank you very much for the additional feedback, Roger. There had recently been a very interesting, similar discussion on this mailing list regarding a multi-version jOOQ/Flyway schema generation: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/jooq-user/I9iLbMQNN8o/Zrs-fi2bCQAJ
I'm definitely sensing a common use-case for many jOOQ users here. In the next months, I will give this some deeper thought to see how jOOQ can better integrate with Flyway, e.g. by supporting a "jOOQ migrations" module. It does sound very interesting in any case. Looking forward to hearing how your experiments go 2016-05-06 14:21 GMT+02:00 RIT <[email protected]>: > > The hashcode/checksum only has to be consistent per target SQLDialect as > it will be at this level that Flyway will be operating, so the above > statement would indicate it should work just fine. Any changes to things > like case configuration would blow up the whole codebase, so in many ways > having Flyway report that all the hashcodes have changed would be a major > benefit as it would indicate that something has changed which may otherwise > be overlooked. > Interesting, so I guess the current hashCode() implementation will work perfectly for you. One more caveat I have thought of: There is some small risk of the hashCodes() (just like the SQL strings) changing between jOOQ minor releases - e.g. when jOOQ slightly modifies the generated SQL in case it needs some emulation. I don't think that will be a general problem though, just something to keep in mind. Cheers, Lukas -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jOOQ User Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
