Re: Final release?

From: Andrus Adamchik (andru..bjectstyle.org)
Date: Fri Jul 07 2006 - 16:32:32 EDT

  • Next message: Andrus Adamchik (JIRA): "[JIRA] Created: (CAY-592) Modifying an object that has a to one relationship to an object that uses inheritance, breaks the relationship."

    Sure, let's solve those two issues first. Among other things this'll
    give me more time to finish the documentation.

    Andrus

    On Jul 7, 2006, at 3:52 PM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:

    > I'd also like to hold off on a final release until I can solve my own
    > problems introduced after B3. I probably won't get to it today,
    > though.
    >
    > On 7/7/06, Gentry, Michael (Contractor)
    > <michael_gentr..anniemae.com> wrote:
    >> I hate to be a party pooper, but I have another concern ...
    >>
    >> Now that I can insert again (thanks!), I run into this problem.
    >> Given:
    >>
    >> CollectionElement ->> Item <<- Notification
    >>
    >> If I insert an Item (it is just a many-to-many linkage table) in one
    >> request, and then immediately delete it again in the next request,
    >> I am
    >> getting optimistic locking exceptions. If I restart the app, I
    >> can then
    >> go in and delete it. Here are some of the logs when doing the
    >> delete:
    >>
    >>
    >> item (starting out):
    >> PID=0x00000000000000225c85a35e]{<ObjectId:PSEnumeratedItem,
    >> identifier=[..d5543>; committed;
    >> [collectionElement=>{<ObjectId:PSLocalCollectionElement,
    >> identifier=[..6c157>}; moniker=>ES;
    >> notification=>{<ObjectId:FENotification, identifier=[..36b89>}]}
    >>
    >> collectionElement.removeFromItems(item);
    >> [PID=0x00000000000000225c85a35e]{<ObjectId:PSEnumeratedItem,
    >> identifier=[..d5543>; modified; [collectionElement=>null;
    >> moniker=>ES;
    >> notification=>{<ObjectId:FENotification, identifier=[..36b89>}]}
    >>
    >> notification.removeFromItems(item);
    >> [PID=0x00000000000000225c85a35e]{<ObjectId:PSEnumeratedItem,
    >> identifier=[..d5543>; modified; [collectionElement=>null;
    >> moniker=>ES;
    >> notification=>null]}
    >>
    >> dataContext.deleteObject(item);
    >> [PID=0x00000000000000225c85a35e]{<ObjectId:PSEnumeratedItem,
    >> identifier=[..d5543>; deleted; [collectionElement=>null;
    >> moniker=>ES;
    >> notification=>null]}
    >>
    >> dataContext.commitChanges();
    >> org.objectstyle.cayenne.access.QueryLogger - DELETE FROM PS_Item
    >> WHERE
    >> identifier = ? AND elementPID IS NULL AND moniker = ? AND
    >> objectPID IS
    >> NULL
    >> org.objectstyle.cayenne.access.QueryLogger - [bind: < 00 00 00 00
    >> 00 00
    >> 00 22 5C 85 A3 5E >, NULL, 'ES', NULL]
    >> org.objectstyle.cayenne.access.QueryLogger - *** error.
    >> org.objectstyle.cayenne.access.OptimisticLockException: [v.1.2M12
    >> March
    >> 23 2006] Optimistic Lock Failure, SQL: [DELETE FROM PS_Item WHERE
    >> identifier = ? AND elementPID IS NULL AND moniker = ? AND
    >> objectPID IS
    >> NULL], WHERE clause bindings: [moniker='ES', identifier=< 00 00 00
    >> 00 00
    >> 00 00 22 5C 85 A3 5E >, objectPID=NULL, elementPID=NULL]
    >>
    >>
    >> Ignore the 1.2M12 -- I'm running against the latest from Subversion
    >> within Eclipse (guess that M12 the last time I did a full build using
    >> ant). The bind output is also misleading -- 4 values for 2 ?'s (I
    >> thought I fixed that at one point, but maybe that was for UPDATE
    >> only).
    >> Anyway, this code used to work in 1.2M9 (and earlier). I use
    >> optimistic
    >> locking on everything, but there are no cascade/etc delete rules.
    >>
    >> I'll experiment/debug more, just thought I'd report it in case you
    >> were
    >> trying to put out the release.
    >>
    >> Thanks!
    >>
    >> /dev/mrg
    >>
    >> -----Original Message-----
    >> From: Andrus Adamchik [mailto:andru..bjectstyle.org
    >> <mailto:andru..bjectstyle.org> ]
    >> Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 10:33 AM
    >> To: cayenne-de..ncubator.apache.org
    >> Subject: Re: Final release?
    >>
    >>
    >> Let's at least submit this as a bug. I think I may have an older
    >> Linux box where I can put Sybase and play with a solution that I had
    >> in mind.
    >>
    >> In any event whatever fix we end up with, it should be possible to
    >> stick it in a custom PkGenerator, so it shouldn't be a problem for
    >> 1.2 users if it goes in release 3.0 (and we can port it to 1.2.1 as
    >> well).
    >>
    >> Andrus
    >>
    >> On Jul 6, 2006, at 10:16 AM, Gentry, Michael ((Contractor)) wrote:
    >> > My biggest concern right now is the Sybase PK question. If I
    >> can get
    >> > our DBA (who is out right now) to set me up a playground somewhere,
    >> > I'll
    >> > test it. Of course, we could decide to handle that as a bug
    >> fix, too.
    >> > Either way, I won't be upgrading past M9 for a bit ...
    >> >
    >> > Thanks,
    >> >
    >> > /dev/mrg
    >> >
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > -----Original Message-----
    >> > From: Andrus Adamchik [mailto:andru..bjectstyle.org
    >> <mailto:andru..bjectstyle.org> ]
    >> > Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 11:07 AM
    >> > To: cayenne-de..ncubator.apache.org
    >> > Subject: Final release?
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > I think it's time to make the final release of 1.2 and move ahead
    >> > with other things that we planned. I am working on finishing the
    >> > documentation (namely remote object persistence tutorial), and
    >> fixing
    >> > last minute bugs. I think we are in a good shape overall. So how
    >> > about a release sometime early next week.
    >> >
    >> > Comments? Objections?
    >> >
    >> > Andrus
    >> >
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Fri Jul 07 2006 - 16:33:42 EDT