Re: Discussing 1.2.3 and 2.0.3 release

From: Michael Gentry (blacknex..mail.com)
Date: Fri Apr 27 2007 - 14:38:25 EDT

  • Next message: Kevin Menard: "RE: Discussing 1.2.3 and 2.0.3 release"

    I'm not opposed to patches. I'm having to maintain my own 1.2, anyway. :-)

    Thanks!

    /dev/mrg

    On 4/27/07, Mike Kienenberger <mkienen..mail.com> wrote:
    >
    > Michael, this might be fixed if you're using the outer-join patch. I
    > seem to recall a similar situation that was cleaned up when I
    > reorganized the query translator classes. Might be worth a quick
    > check if you don't mind applying the patch and giving it a whirl.
    >
    > On 4/27/07, Michael Gentry <blacknex..mail.com> wrote:
    > > Well, I've discovered another one (at least in 1.2, which implies 2.0,
    > > also), but haven't tracked it down enough yet. I don't think it has
    > > anything to do with our binary PKs, either. In a nutshell, I had
    > optimistic
    > > locking turned on everything, including relationships and had:
    > >
    > > A ->> B (A to-many-to B)
    > >
    > > When I updated attributes in A and B and committed the changes, I'd get
    > an
    > > optimistic locking exception because the SQL generated looked like:
    > >
    > > UPDATE A set foo = 'bar'
    > > WHERE primaryKey IS NULL AND ...
    > >
    > > For some reason, it is nulling out the PK when figuring out the
    > > differences. (Strangely, it doesn't null out the PK in B -- it was
    > updating
    > > before the A record and the PK was there.) I just haven't had time to
    > track
    > > it down. My solution was to uncheck optimistic locking.
    > >
    > > I'm not opposed to a new release, but I know there is something lurking
    > > there, too.
    > >
    > > Thanks,
    > >
    > > /dev/mrg
    > >
    > >
    > > On 4/27/07, Andrus Adamchik <andru..bjectstyle.org> wrote:
    > > >
    > > > I wish our next release could have been 3.0M1, and we got very close.
    > > > For my part I need about two weeks of uninterrupted work on Cayenne -
    > > > something I can't afford now :-/
    > > >
    > > > Nevertheless, we have 13 closed bugs on each of the stable branches
    > > > (1.2 and 2.0), so I think this is a good time to synchronously
    > > > release 1.2.3 and 2.0.3. Unless we hear from committers who are still
    > > > working on some stable issues (or some other objections), I'll start
    > > > a vote thread shortly.
    > > >
    > > > Thanks
    > > > Andrus
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Fri Apr 27 2007 - 14:38:53 EDT