OPENJPA-247
Thanks,
-dain
On May 30, 2007, at 12:45 PM, Kevin Sutter wrote:
Dain,
If you've tried these variations, then it sure sounds like a bug.
Go ahead
and create a JIRA report. Even if we determine an alternate
solution or
answer, at least it will be documented. Thanks.
Kevin
Dain,
If you've tried these variations, then it sure sounds like a bug. Go ahead
and create a JIRA report. Even if we determine an alternate solution or
answer, at least it will be documented. Thanks.
Kevin
On 5/29/07, Dain Sundstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks for taking a look at th
Thanks for taking a look at this. I tried adding a flush after the
remove but the test fails at the same location. I also tried
commenting out the merge calls, but it fails at the same point.
Any ideas? Do you think it is a bug?
-dain
On May 29, 2007, at 11:50 AM, Kevin Sutter wrote:
H
Hi Dain,
Your nudge worked... I noticed your append last week, but didn't act on
it. If I remember correctly, I think there are some nuances with our
merge() processing. From what I can tell, your example doesn't explicitly
require the merge() invocations (although they shouldn't hurt). I have
^nudge
-dain
On May 24, 2007, at 8:13 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
I have a piece of code that effectively does the same thing the
following test does:
private void newDeleteNew() throws Exception {
beginTx();
// Create new
Person dain = new Person();
dain.
