Hi,
While I still wonder about why detaching my entities doesn't reduce my heap
memory usage,
I also wonder whether there is a possibility for a query to return detached
objects in the first place?
This might be quite efficient for scenarios where you need to read lots of data
but not update
Hi Rick,
when I use
property name=openjpa.MetaDataFactory value=
org.apache.openjpa.persistence.jdbc.PersistenceMappingFactory(types=com.retail_sc.test.entity.Group;com.retail_sc.test.entity.Person;)
/
The same error (no registered metadata) occurs.
After some investigation (looking
Michael -
While I still wonder about why detaching my entities doesn't reduce my
heap memory usage
You didn't mention what level of code you are running on, but if it is
2.0, it might be a bug. Try setting the following property: property
name=openjpa.Compatibility value=CopyOnDetach=false/
Going back to your original email, the documentation is misleading. While
you could use PersistenceMetaDataFactory you'd probably prefer to use
PersistenceMappingFactory. Basically, you did the right thing by extending
the PersistenceMappingFactory..
The product derivations are confusing, because
Hi,
please note that my example/junit test works fine as long as I don't
change the Mapping Factory properties. Only when changing the
MappingFactory it goes wrong.
My Group Entity looks like this:
@Embeddable
public class GroupPK {
/*Group Number*/
Hi Marcel,
Thanks for sending the embeddable PK, I was missing that part.
I see everything work if I set the MappingFactory plugin to the default
value (org.apache.openjpa...) or leave the property blank. When I use a
custom mapping factory I get the error where the column names aren't picked
up
Hi again,
I did a little digging and I have a couple of ideas on how to fix the
problem. Can you tell me what you want to do with your extension to the
MappingFactory? There might be another way to get what you need to do done.
Or at least a different workaround that you can use while we work on
