So I'm having a bit of a hard time with this property setting. In many environments, it makes a lot of sense to line up the openjpa.PersistenceUnitName property with the setting in the persistence.xml file. However, in an appserver, that name might not be unique. We (BEA) sometimes need to be able to get the "fully-qualified" persistence unit name, which is probably most closely defined in a Java EE environment as application-name.module-name.persistence-unit-name or somesuch.
But obviously, if I create a property called openjpa.PersistenceUnitName, people would (understandably) assume that the property should contain just persistence-unit-name, and not the fully-qualified beast. That's why I was thinking along the terms of 'Id' instead of 'PersistenceUnitName'. Do others agree that these concepts are not quite the same? If so, should I create a property for each (since PersistenceUnitName might be useful), or should I just create the ID-related one, since that's all I really need right now? -Patrick -- Patrick Linskey BEA Systems, Inc. _______________________________________________________________________ Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 4:50 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: openjpa.Id property > > Hi Patrick, > > I don't think there would be an issue with calling it unitName or > persistenceUnitName, as in getUnitName() or > getPersistenceUnitName(). > It will be common for people to try to figure out what the Id > property from a Configuration really means so the more help we give > them the easier it will be to remember. > > openjpa.unitName > openjpa.persistenceUnitName > > Maybe I'm missing something obvious... > > Craig > > On Nov 9, 2006, at 2:19 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > It's useful in a number of places to get an identifier for a > > particular > > Configuration. For example, as we discussed a few months > ago, it would > > be useful if the logging subsystem automatically wrote the > persistence > > unit's ID along with log messages if no such ID was specified in > > the log > > configuration. > > > > Any objections to such an addition? In a JPA environment, this would > > correspond to the persistence unit's unitName attribute. > > > > Any suggestions for a better name than openjpa.Id for the > property? > > This > > would result in an OpenJPAConfiguration.getId() method call that > > returned a String. > > > > -Patrick > > > > -- > > Patrick Linskey > > BEA Systems, Inc. > > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > ________ > > _ > > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may > > contain > > information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and > > affiliated > > entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted > > and/or > > legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the > > individual > > or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended > > recipient, > > and have received this message in error, please immediately return > > this > > by email and then delete it. > > Craig Russell > Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo > 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! > >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
