Mike, Achim -
I just checked in the patch, since I realized that I will be making
some changes to the mapping layer to support inheritance, and it will
be hard to merge your patch after that. I will work on modeler support
for locking a bit later.
Refactoring that I've done is mostly formal, I haven't gone too deep.
Here is what I've done:
1. Added mockrunner.jar to CVS.
2. Changed the names of lock-related properties in the mapping layer to
follow Java Bean naming conventions for booleans.
3. In DataNode I noticed that "runBatchUpdateAsBatch" is never called
when optimistic locking is in effect, so I removed the locking code
from this method.
4. Refactored DataNode.runBatchUpdateAsIndividualQueries to remove
redundant code, since the flow is essentially the same no matter
whether the locking is used or not.
Unit tests all pass OK. Let me know if my changes have caused any
problems.
Thanks
Andrus
On Mar 18, 2004, at 12:12 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> Thank you and Achim for doing all this work on optimistic locking! It
> has been at the top of Cayenne priority list for quiet some time. In
> fact this and inheritance are the two remaining major features that
> are a "must have" in 1.1. I hope soon I'll get a long enough break
> from other things to get up to speed on that and commit your patch.
>
> IIRC Andriy has also developed some kind of locking code on his own.
> Andriy do you have any comments?
>
>
> On Mar 16, 2004, at 5:31 PM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
>> This leaves 3 data files and 3 old patches (2 of which are defective)
>> which
>> should probably be removed.
>
> Done.
>
>> If there are no objections, I will probably announce this patch on the
>> cayenne-user mailing list in a week (I want to make sure Achim
>> doesn't find
>> any SQL server (or other) issues).
>
> I have no objections. Please go ahead. "Release often, release early"
> :-)
>
> Andrus
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sat Mar 20 2004 - 16:05:38 EST