Sorry, I haven't ... it is on my TODO list - I am indeed pretty busy
now.
Andrus
On May 4, 2006, at 5:37 PM, Kevin Menard wrote:
> Andrus,
>
> Were you able to give this any consideration yet? I know you've
> been busy with the JPA stuff, so if not, it's understandable.
>
> If my comments weren't clear enough in the test case what appears
> to be happening is that given objects A, B, & C, where A's class
> has relationships with both the classes of B & C:
>
> 1) Set up relationship between A & B, where at least one is
> registered with a given DC.
> -- Relationship is set up fine in the object store
>
> 2) Unregister A.
> -- All relationships with A are removed from the object store
> -- If you call A.getB(), you get B, even though the object store
> has a null value for that relationship
>
> 3) Set up relationship between A & C.
> -- A is auto-registered with C's context
> -- Object store is updated with relationship between A & C
> -- Object store is not updated with relationship between A & B
>
> 4) Commit A.
> -- Relationship between A & C is persisted while the one between A
> & B is not
> -- A still thinks it has established relationships with B & C.
>
> Hopefully that made sense.
>
> --
> Kevin
>
> On Wed, 03 May 2006 09:59:03 -0400, Kevin Menard
> <kmenar..ervprise.com> wrote:
>
>> Okay, test has been committed to
>> org.objectstyle.cayenne.access.ObjectStoreTst. If you agree that
>> it's an issue, I'll file a JIRA issue. Regardless of whether I'm
>> doing something wrong in my workflow, I think Cayenne is still
>> behaving improperly in reporting and recording different object
>> graphs.
>>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu May 04 2006 - 17:41:19 EDT