Hey, This sounds interesting. Actually a nice way to do tests from a clean db, a problem I have myself which I circumvented with a modified Hibernate.
Can you send me your H2 OpenEJB configuration. I want to set it up and see if I can get it going. Will let you know what I come up with - even if it means to make a simple junit runner just for this purpose. It would be great to have tests run on a clean db everytime. Quintin Beukes On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Laird Nelson <ljnel...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Quintin Beukes <quin...@skywalk.co.za>wrote: > >> Yes,it is managed by the container and the context. The initial >> context will close with the VM. Afaik it will have the same behaviour >> after the test closes as the EJB would. > > > OK; good to know. > > From you e-mail I figure your focus is on the automatic destruction of >> > the db. > > > Yes. H2, specifically. > > I've *never* had luck with the DB being automatically destroyed between > tests. I've closed the context, used the magic property (destroyOnClose? > don't remember offhand), tried setting up H2 without the DB_CLOSE_DELAY > setting, *with* the DB_CLOSE_DELAY setting--nothing. It might have to do > with the strange intersection of (a) there being a connection pool and (b) > H2's being an in-memory database that tries to destroy itself when it thinks > it's safe to do so. > > I can verify this because when I have two test methods that each try to > persist an object with the same ID--which would succeed in a blank > database--my second method fails. > > To be clear, then, I want my named H2 database to be wiped out and > recreated--complete with DDL generation as described by my JPA > mappings--before each test method is run. > > To put it one final way, I want my test code to look like this: > X x = new X(); > this.em.persist(x); > > ...i.e. no beginning transactions, no shutting down databases, no mucking > about with EntityManagerFactories, etc. etc. etc. Just bare bones > simplicity. Frankly OpenEJB need not even be involved, but it seemed like > an easy black box that would enable most of these kinds of tests. > > Thanks for getting involved, > Laird >
