Yes that is our configuration. OK, "hands off" is fine with me. :)
On Jun 8, 2010, at 11:42 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> Yeah I'd say it is superfluous in the recommended configurations (i.e. if you bind a context to a session, and logging out equals session termination).
>
> Andrus
>
> On Jun 8, 2010, at 8:15 AM, Joe Baldwin wrote:
>
>> Andrus,
>>
>> I read this post by you and am wondering should I initiate an "unregisterObjects" in the normal course of events, when say someone is logging out (in a webstore design pattern) to "suggest" memory management events, or is that superfluous and your "weak reference" algorithm is sufficient?
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>> On Jun 7, 2010, at 11:04 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>>
>>> Invalidate should hollow the objects, but keep their references in the context (they shouldn't resolve to committed though, so I am surprised about that).
>>>
>>> DataContext also has a method "unregisterObjects" (not a part of ObjectContext interface) that should forget about the objects in a given context, clear the shared cache, and send invalidate event to peer contexts.
>>>
>>> Andrus
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 7, 2010, at 7:58 AM, Tore Halset wrote:
>>>
>>>> Well, processSnapshotChanges did not solve the problem either. I am now doing deleteObjects() after deleting them via plain jdbc. It is not pretty, but works well as long as the objects are in state COMITTED.
>>>>
>>>> - Tore.
>>>>
>>>> On Jun 7, 2010, at 12:27, Tore Halset wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello.
>>>>>
>>>>> This one seem to work much better.
>>>>>
>>>>> ((DataContext) ctxt).getObjectStore().getDataRowCache().processSnapshotChanges(this,
>>>>> Collections.EMPTY_MAP, deletedIds, Collections.EMPTY_LIST,
>>>>> Collections.EMPTY_LIST);
>>>>>
>>>>> - Tore.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 7, 2010, at 09:27 , Tore Halset wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am deleting some rows via jdbc and want to update the cayenne stack with that information. After issuing ctxt.invalidateObjects(...) the cayenne objects for the deleted rows still have persistence state comitted. Is there a better trick than invalidateObjects(...)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Tore.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Jun 08 2010 - 15:53:40 UTC