Re: commitChanges() doesn't imply commit in db ?

From: Andrus Adamchik (andru..bjectstyle.org)
Date: Sun Apr 08 2007 - 09:36:58 EDT

Next message: Michael Gentry: "Re: Testing on Sybase"

Previous message: Andrus Adamchik: "Testing on Sybase"
In reply to: jerome moliere: "Re: commitChanges() doesn't imply commit in db ?"
Next in thread: Michael Gentry: "Re: commitChanges() doesn't imply commit in db ?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Apr 4, 2007, at 5:27 AM, jerome moliere wrote:

> (I 'm using the JTDS driver now)
> one big difference is that now : cayenne uses the generic db
> adapter because
> the JDBC driver doesn't understand the meta data returned from db...

FYI - this is fixed in 1.2, 2.0 and 3.0 branches per CAY-775 issue in
Jira.

Andrus

Next message: Michael Gentry: "Re: Testing on Sybase"
Previous message: Andrus Adamchik: "Testing on Sybase"
In reply to: jerome moliere: "Re: commitChanges() doesn't imply commit in db ?"
Next in thread: Michael Gentry: "Re: commitChanges() doesn't imply commit in db ?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sun Apr 08 2007 - 09:37:29 EDT