> On Feb 16, 2005, at 10:08 PM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
> > It looks like the solution is to use getCachedSnapshot() instead (which
> > first returns getRetainedSnapshot() if available).
> > Does this make sense?
Andrus Adamchik <andru..bjectstyle.org> wrote:
> On the one hand it does. On the other hand what if there is no cached
> snapshot either (e.g. some snapshots are invalidated manually or
> removed when a shared cache reaches its size limit)? One solution I see
> is to retain snapshots of deleted objects (just like we do for the
> modified ones) if optimistic locking is involved.
That sounds good to me, but I have no idea how it's done :)
I've added this to the issue along with flattened relationships. I'm not
sure what further progress I will make on either issue.
-Mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Feb 22 2005 - 10:26:28 EST