You are right, in practice we query on only a few properties.
Do You intend to support both eager and lazy migration at the same
time (would be handy, if I deploy a new version, where a single entity
with only a few instances has a 'difficult' change and several
entities have 'easy' changes).
That might be out of scope for 1.0, though.
Kent
Den 17/09/2009 kl. 07.12 skrev Rickard Öberg:
Kent Sølvsten wrote:
Sounds excellent!
I really like the option to decide between eager and lazy migration.
A question comes to mind, though.
What happens when I have a lazy migration renameProperty("oldName",
"newName") and then attempt to query for the entities with
newname=foo?
Will I find the entities that are not migrated yet?
It sounds like a difficult case to support. On the other hand it
would seriously reduce the value of lazy migration if unsupported.
Right, so that's one of the tradeoffs you have to make. If you are
changing a property that you know is used by queries you will
probably want to do eager migration. If the property is only used
through the domain model you can afford to do it lazily.
But with the proposed model you have a choice. If you are doing
queries on 10 out of 100 properties that's a whole lot of
possibilities for lazy migration...
/Rickard
_______________________________________________
qi4j-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
_______________________________________________
qi4j-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
