Comments inline

----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


> Hello,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > I have just encountered a situation that I THINK is a bug in
> > the Identity
> > object. The equals method compares the topLevelClass, and I
> > think it should
> > be comparing the realClass.
>
> I think others have explained why this cannot work.
> The realClass might be unknown when the identities are compared.
>

After digging through the code more, I now realize that this is the case.
When materializing references, only the class specified in the
reference-descriptor is known and usable for searching the cache.

> > I'll try to explain my situation, and I HOPE that I can do so clearly.
> >
> > I have a class AB, which derives from abstract class A, and implements
> > interface B.
>
> this is a case where the topLevelClass is not determined uniquely.
>
> I think OJB cannot handle this correctly.  This problem is addressed,
> too, in the current thread "Identity.realClass set to abstract class?!"
> in the developers' list.
>
> As a workaround, you might wish to introduce an artificial
> top-level class for each connected component of you inheritance tree.
> Than this will be the topLevelClass for all references to classes
> in that hierarchy.  But watch out: depending on your mapping, this
> may result in a serious loss of performance, because when resolving
> a reference to an object of such a class, all tables of classes
> of that object will have to be searched in.
>

We don't really like that idea ;-{   But this problem is a big issue for me
right now, so I will be digging in more. I'll get back to the list when I
(think) I have a solution.

Thanks,
Dave D

> Olli
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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]

Reply via email to