Re: UserObject

2005-09-29 Thread Karan Malhi
Hi Craig, This is assuming that both the beans are on the same jvm I dont see this kind of a scenario working on the two SSB's on different JVM's. Correct? "The UserObject pattern is intended for applications that need to access some local state that is associated with the persistence context" A

UserObject

2005-09-29 Thread Craig Russell
Hi Karan, Yes, this use case is absolutely supported, assuming that transaction propagation is in effect. If there is no transaction propagation, you can still achieve the same effect if you pass a "live" object from one bean to another: class SSBA { pm = pmf.getPM(); SomeState ss = new SomeStat

[jira] Commented: (JDO-153) Upgrade springframework version used in tck20/tck11

2005-09-29 Thread Craig Russell (JIRA)
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-153?page=comments#action_12330879 ] Craig Russell commented on JDO-153: --- The patch looks fine. It's interesting how many lines of code need to be modified just to change /1.1.3/1.2.5/g Craig > Upgrade springfra

Re: PersistenceManager UserObject

2005-09-29 Thread Michael Bouschen
Hi Karan, yes, I think this should work. Regards Michael Hi Michael, I am thinking of a scenario where it can be used. Correct me if i am wrong. lets say a stateless session bean (Container managed transaction), has a method method A(){ // get the pm pm.setUserObject(new Object()); B(); pm.clo

Re: PersistenceManager UserObject

2005-09-29 Thread Karan Malhi
Hi Michael, I am thinking of a scenario where it can be used. Correct me if i am wrong. lets say a stateless session bean (Container managed transaction), has a method method A(){ // get the pm pm.setUserObject(new Object()); B(); pm.close(); } another session bean has method B(){ //get

JDO TCK Conference Call Friday, Sep 30, 9 am PDT

2005-09-29 Thread Michelle Caisse
Hi, We will have our regular meeting Friday, September 30 at 9 am PDT to discuss JDO TCK issues and status. Dial-in numbers are: 866 230-6968 294-0479# International: +1 865 544-7856 Agenda: Test status (Michael W) Detached objects (Matthew) Query tests (Michael, Michael) Maven console i

Re: PersistenceManager UserObject

2005-09-29 Thread Michael Bouschen
Hi Karan, Hi Craig, Thanks. What happens to the user object once i close the pm? I think nothing will happen. Accoring to the spec a user object is not inspected or used in any way by the JDO implementation. Regards Michael On 9/29/05, Craig Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Ka

Re: PersistenceManager UserObject

2005-09-29 Thread Karan Malhi
Hi Craig, Thanks. What happens to the user object once i close the pm? On 9/29/05, Craig Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Karan, > > The UserObject pattern is intended for applications that need to > access some local state that is associated with the persistence > context. Any persiste

PersistenceManager UserObject

2005-09-29 Thread Craig Russell
Hi Karan, The UserObject pattern is intended for applications that need to access some local state that is associated with the persistence context. Any persistent object can navigate to its persistence manager and access some application-specific data. This turned out to be very useful in JDO, so

user object with pm

2005-09-29 Thread Karan Malhi
Hi Craig, What is the purpose of get/setUserObject in the pm api? What would be the use-case where i would use these methods? -- Karan Malhi

Re: status update: ri11 enhancer support for jdk 1.5

2005-09-29 Thread Michael Bouschen
Hi Martin, thanks for the comments! About the issue of a class argument of a wrong classloader passed to the JavaModel method getJavaType: I agree the code should use the class loader from the class object. The only issue is that the call clazz.getClassLoader() might result in a SecurityExcep

Re: Inheritance test schema 2

2005-09-29 Thread Michael Watzek
Hi Andy, I agree that inheritance mapping 2 is missing some orm information wrt Employee relationships. Due to this lack, implementations cannot figure out the right runtime type at navigation time, e.g. navigating from Project to Employee. For this reason we need to adapt the orm and the sc

Re: status update: ri11 enhancer support for jdk 1.5

2005-09-29 Thread Martin Zaun
Hi Michael, thanks for the patch, only a few cosmetic comments inline, below. I'll send out a summary of our discussion on the jdk 1.5 class registration problem and the chosen approach later. Martin Michael Bouschen wrote: Hi Martin, attached you find a patch for the JDOModel implementation.