2009/11/10 Jacek Sokulski <[email protected]>
> Hi,
> I have tried to use Jdbm and according to posts in:
> http://lists.ops4j.org/pipermail/qi4j-dev/2009-June/005406.html
>
It turned out that it was rdf indexing persistence problem not jdbm
configuration.
If anyone interested the configuration of Rdf that works is:
module.addObjects(EntityStateSerializer.class,
EntityTypeSerializer.class);
module.addServices(NativeRepositoryService.class).identifiedBy(
"rdf-repository").instantiateOnStartup();
module.addServices(RdfFactoryService.class).visibleIn(application)
.instantiateOnStartup();
module.addServices(RdfQueryService.class).visibleIn(application)
.instantiateOnStartup();
ModuleAssembly config = module.layerAssembly().moduleAssembly(
"Config" );
config.addEntities(NativeConfiguration.class).visibleIn( application
);
although I am not sure if it is correct one.
Anyway the question if AbstractValueType hierarchy should behave as now is
still valid.
> tried to fix entitystore-preferences to pass the tests and it seems that
> there is a problem with either AbstractValueType hierarchy:
> org.qi4j.runtime.types.DateType extends AbstractStringType and does not
> override isString method() so isString return true;
>
>
> or with PreferencesEntityStoreMixin:
>
> line 412 PreferencesEntityStoreMixin.java:
> else if( propertyType.type().isString() )
> {
> propsPrefs.put( propertyType.qualifiedName().name(), (String)
> value );
> }
> propertyType.type() is of DateType type and (String) value throws cast
> exception as value is of Data type. So the solution depends on if DataType
> should return true for isString().
>
> BTW.
> I do not understand why *configuration* persistence is required for Jdbm
> persistence to work.
>
> Jacek
>
> J.
_______________________________________________
qi4j-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
