Re: Non-physical delete... again

From: Andrey Razumovsky (razumovsky.andre..mail.com)
Date: Tue Jun 02 2009 - 10:25:35 EDT

  • Next message: Andrus Adamchik: "Re: Non-physical delete... again"

    I swiched to DataMap after I saw no quick access to DataDomain in
    BatchAction class. This needs futher investigation, we need to pass domain
    there somehow. I assume API changes in public classes of access.jdbc package
    are allowed?

    2009/6/2 Andrus Adamchik <andru..bjectstyle.org>

    > Excellent. I have one comment (consistent with my position in the previous
    > message). Configuration of the factory below should be attached to the stack
    > objects (e.g. DataDomain), not the mapping objects (DataMap):
    >
    > +
    > + /**
    > + * Sets factory for creating QueryBuilders
    > + */
    > + public void setQueryBuilderFactory(BatchQueryBuilderFactory
    > queryBuilderFactory) {
    > + this.queryBuilderFactory = queryBuilderFactory;
    > + }
    > +
    > + /**
    > + *..eturn factory for creating QueryBuilders. Might be null
    > + */
    > + public BatchQueryBuilderFactory getQueryBuilderFactory() {
    > + return queryBuilderFactory;
    > + }
    >
    > Cheers,
    > Andrus
    >
    > P.S. Maybe you can separately commit the..eprecated part of the patch ;-)
    >
    >
    >
    > On Jun 2, 2009, at 5:07 PM, Andrey Razumovsky wrote:
    >
    > For not to be unsubstantiated, I uploaded my vision of the feature. Note
    >> that there is no modeler support. It allows to provide custom factory that
    >> creates builders of INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE queries. 'Soft-delete' factory
    >> is
    >> included.
    >> I do not say that 'soft delete' checkbox is not needed, but uploaded code
    >> is
    >> much more generic and allows to plug any behavior (maybe even Ari's
    >> proposed
    >> 'versions'). 'Soft' strategy can be configured with 'deleted' field name
    >> and
    >> will not fire UPDATE if such field does not exist in DB table.
    >>
    >> Please add your comments!
    >>
    >> Thanks,
    >> Andrey
    >>
    >> 2009/6/2 Andrus Adamchik <andru..bjectstyle.org>
    >>
    >>
    >>> On Jun 2, 2009, at 2:54 PM, Andrey Razumovsky wrote:
    >>>
    >>> But I'm no fan of adding some sort of 'soft' checkbox for dbattributes
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> I was suggesting marking entity with a "soft delete" checkbox (not
    >>> individual attribute - this would make no sense), and creating a criteria
    >>> based on qualifier that references an attribute.
    >>>
    >>> Modeler support will be covered by setting class name of strategy
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> I am afraid this approach will be rather arbitrary to the end user, so I
    >>> suggest we discuss it some more before putting it in Cayenne. Marking an
    >>> entity to use "soft delete" based on some criteria is a clear and
    >>> understandable feature. Setting a "delete strategy" is not, and will
    >>> contribute to confusion. This is totally be ok as a backend extension
    >>> point,
    >>> but I will hate to see that as a general use feature.
    >>>
    >>> Andrus
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Jun 02 2009 - 10:26:07 EDT