I shouldn't even call it "old id"... it's "the id". On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 8:04 AM, Clinton Begin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> You don't need the exact OldObject instance. You just need the ID. > There's no magic there... you simply cannot update the database record > without the old id... > > Clinton > > On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 7:57 AM, mule_user <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> My fundamental question was: >> >> Is there a way to achieve optimistic locking using timestamp attribute, if >> the "OldObject" and/or the update timestamp of the old object is available >> in scope. >> >> All the solutions require you to keep the "OldObject" in scope because, >> the >> where clause; requires you to pass the ID of the "OldObject" and update >> timestamp of the "OldObject". >> >> Otimistic locking requires keeping "OldObject" in scope. I was hoping that >> there could be another solution using iBATIS where I do not have to keep >> "OldObject" in scope. >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/IBATIS-2.3.3%2C-JDK-1.5---Optimistic-locking-strategies-tp19867989p19899543.html >> Sent from the iBATIS - User - Java mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >
