"Armin Waibel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Hi Sean,

Hello, Armin.

> I'm nearly sure that OJB never starts new threads by its own. AFAIK only
> the commons-DBCP api starts a new thread (if you enable it) to
> monitor/manage the used connections (used in a ConnectionFactory
> implementation, but per default OJB use it's own connection pool).

I looked in the OJB.properties file and found the following...

ConnectionFactoryClass=org.apache.ojb.broker.accesslayer.ConnectionFactoryP
ooledImpl

...and the line with DBCP is commented out, so it doesn't look like DBCP is
the culprit.

>
>  > maintaining uses an opaque persistence framework that extends OJB; it
> Do this framework use unchanged OJB sources?

I can't know for sure, but I doubt it.  The framework was licensed with the
application that was produced by this consulting company (that is, the same
company that produced this framework wrote a custom software application
based on their framework).  Having worked with their source code for the
application, I don't think that they would be capable of that.

I've been working on this problem off and on for about a week now; if
anyone knows of a solution, please post it here.  If I find the solution,
I'll do the same.

Thanks.

> regards,
> Armin
>
> Sean Dockery wrote:
> > Unfortunately, I'm stuck on version 0.9.8.  The application that I'm
> > maintaining uses an opaque persistence framework that extends OJB; it
> > creates classes explicitly which have disappeared between 0.9.8 and
1.0RC4.
> > But because I'm using PB calls directly, I'm certain that this problem
has
> > nothing to do with the opaque persistence framework.  (The value of
this
> > software company's persistence framework is dubious; I'll be glad when
we
> > can rid ourselves of it.)
> >
> > "Antonio Gallardo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >>Hi Sean:
> >>
> >>AFAIK, this would not happen. BTW, what version are you using?
> >>
> >>Best Regards,
> >>
> >>Antonio Gallardo
> >>
> >>Sean Dockery dijo:
> >>
> >>>Hello there.
> >>>
> >>>I've had a curious experience recently with OJB, and I was wondering
if
> >>>someone could confirm my speculations about the behaviour.
> >>>
> >>>Suppose I have two objects...  Product and ProductCategory.  The
> >
> > Product
> >
> >>>object carries both a productCategoryId field as well as a reference
> >
> > field
> >
> >>>productCategory which is declared as auto-retrieve in my class
> >
> > descriptor.
> >
> >>>Consider the following code segment...
> >>>
> >>>    Transaction tx = implementation.newTransaction();
> >>>    tx.begin();
> >>>    PersistenceBroker broker = ((HasBroker) tx).getBroker();
> >>>    Product template = new Product();
> >>>    template.setId(productId);
> >>>    Identity identity = new Identity(template, broker);
> >>>    Product result = (Product) broker.getObjectByIdentity(identity);
> >>>    tx.commit();
> >>>
> >>>    // Thread.sleep(50);
> >>>
> >>>    System.out.println(result.getProductCategory().getName());
> >>>
> >>>Curiously, I sometimes experience a null pointer exception because
> >>>result.getProductCategory() return null.  When I uncomment the
> >>>Threat.sleep() call, the null pointer exception never happens.
> >>>
> >>>This seems to suggest that the productCategory reference is being
> >
> > loaded
> >
> >>>by
> >>>another thread.  Is this the case or can someone explain why
> >>>Product.getProductCategory returns null for me sometimes when I first
> >>>retrieve the Product object?
> >>>
> >>>Thanks for your time...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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