Anyone have any insights into this? am really pulling my hair out with this one :(.
Cheers Stefan On Mar 17, 6:39 am, codemonkey <[email protected]> wrote: > No difference is made with an evict, as I said it 100% works if I > don't use my custom collection type. > > Cheers > Stefsn > > On Mar 17, 12:05 am, Asher Newcomer <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Are you sure this works with other types? You're selecting foo2 from the > > session, and then trying to merge it back in without evicting it. This is > > exactly the behavior I'd expect. > > On Mar 16, 2012 7:52 AM, "codemonkey" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > My test is as follows:https://gist.github.com/2049742 > > > > Now the tx.commit after the merge fails with a "a different object > > > with the same identifier value was already associated with the > > > session" but if I don't use my custom list type it works fine. Have I > > > missed something obvious here? > > > > Cheers > > > Stefan > > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > > "nhusers" group. > > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > [email protected]. > > > For more options, visit this group at > > >http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nhusers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en.
