I'll grant that it probably isn't a caching issue. Here's the
field-descriptor from our repository:
<field-descriptor
name="assignedDC"
column="Assigned_DC"
jdbc-type="INTEGER"/>
Full class-descriptor follows (by the way, kudos for creating a framework
that is capable of materializing such complex objects):
<class-descriptor
class="com.xxx.idma.data.CollectionItem"
table="Data_Collection">
<field-descriptor
name="id"
column="Data_Collection_ID"
jdbc-type="INTEGER"
primarykey="true"
autoincrement="true"/>
<field-descriptor
name="versionId"
column="Version_ID"
jdbc-type="INTEGER"
primarykey="true"/>
<field-descriptor
name="approvedDate"
column="Approved_Date"
jdbc-type="TIMESTAMP"/>
<field-descriptor
name="approvedUserId"
column="Approved_User_ID"
jdbc-type="INTEGER"/>
<field-descriptor
name="itemId"
column="Item_ID"
jdbc-type="INTEGER"/>
<field-descriptor
name="requestedDate"
column="Requested_Date"
jdbc-type="TIMESTAMP"/>
<field-descriptor
name="requestedUserId"
column="Requested_User_ID"
jdbc-type="INTEGER"/>
<field-descriptor
name="validatedDate"
column="Validated_Date"
jdbc-type="TIMESTAMP"/>
<field-descriptor
name="validatedUserId"
column="Validated_User_ID"
jdbc-type="INTEGER"/>
<field-descriptor
name="state"
column="State"
jdbc-type="CHAR"/>
<field-descriptor
name="assignedDC"
column="Assigned_DC"
jdbc-type="INTEGER"/>
<field-descriptor
name="mfrCode"
column="Mfr_Code"
jdbc-type="CHAR"/>
<field-descriptor
name="skuCode"
column="Sku_Code"
jdbc-type="VARCHAR"/>
<reference-descriptor
name="itemLocation"
class-ref="com.xxx.idma.data.ItemLocation">
<foreignkey field-ref="versionId"/>
<foreignkey field-ref="itemId"/>
<foreignkey field-ref="assignedDC"/>
</reference-descriptor>
<collection-descriptor
name="commentList"
element-class-ref="com.xxx.idma.data.Comment"
orderBy="commentDate"
sort="DESC">
<inverse-foreignkey field-ref="dataCollectionId"/>
<inverse-foreignkey field-ref="versionId"/>
</collection-descriptor>
<collection-descriptor
name="uomList"
element-class-ref="com.xxx.idma.data.CollectionUOM"
orderBy="level"
sort="ASC">
<inverse-foreignkey field-ref="dataCollectionId"/>
<inverse-foreignkey field-ref="versionId"/>
</collection-descriptor>
<collection-descriptor
name="merchandisingUOMList"
element-class-ref="com.xxx.idma.data.MerchandisingUOM">
<query-customizer
class="com.xxx.idma.data.service.CollectionItemMerchUOMQueryCustomizer"/>
</collection-descriptor>
</class-descriptor>
-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Mahler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 1:33 PM
To: OJB Users List
Subject: Re: Caching/store bug?
IMO this has nothing to do with caching.
the store method itself seems to modify the instance without any
interference of the cache.
Maybe you have defined autoincrement="true" for the assigneDC attribute?
Or did you set locking="true" on this field?
cheers,
Thomas
Rob Kischuk wrote:
>
>
> I'm using OJB 1.0rc3, and running into a rather vexing caching issue - I'm
> hoping someone else can shed some light on the issue. I'm executing the
> following code:
>
>
>
> CollectionItemService service =
CollectionItemService.getInstance();
>
> CollectionItem item = service.findById( collectionItemId );
>
> item.setAssignedDC( 0 );
>
> item.setState( CollectionItem.STATE_UNASSIGNED );
>
> log.info("*** Collection item has ID " + item.getId() );
>
> log.info("*** Assigned DC is " + item.getAssignedDC() );
>
> service.clearCache();
>
> service.store( item );
>
> log.info("*** Collection item has ID " + item.getId() );
>
> log.info("*** Assigned DC is " + item.getAssignedDC() );
>
>
>
> and the service methods look like this:
>
>
>
> protected CollectionItemService()
>
> {
>
> broker = PersistenceBrokerFactory.defaultPersistenceBroker();
>
> }
>
>
>
> public static CollectionItemService getInstance()
>
> {
>
> return new CollectionItemService();
>
> }
>
>
>
> public void store( CollectionItem c ) {
>
> broker.beginTransaction();
>
> broker.store( c );
>
> broker.commitTransaction();
>
> broker.close();
>
> }
>
>
>
> public CollectionItem findById( String collectionItemId )
>
> {
>
> Criteria crit = new Criteria();
>
> crit.addEqualTo("id", collectionItemId);
>
> Query query = new QueryByCriteria( CollectionItem.class, crit );
>
> return (CollectionItem) broker.getObjectByQuery( query );
>
> }
>
>
>
> The debug statements before I call store output:
>
> *** Collection item has ID 1
>
> *** Assigned DC is 0
>
>
>
> and after store, the output is:
>
>
>
> *** Collection item has ID 1
>
> *** Assigned DC is 1 (This was the value prior to setAssignedDC)
>
>
>
> I find it rather vexing that somehow, the broker.store() seems to be
> changing the state of the object I am storing. I see the parameterized
> update statement being properly generated by the SqlGenerator, but the
> database is also not being properly updated. Can anyone shed some light
on
> this problem?
>
>
>
> -Rob
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
