Re: Loading small tables into memory for the application lifetime

From: Mike Kienenberger (mkienen..mail.com)
Date: Mon Jun 30 2008 - 11:33:06 EDT

  • Next message: Andrus Adamchik: "Re: Loading small tables into memory for the application lifetime"

    I don't remember the exact details, so this might be wrong.

    But what about putting the constant tables into a parent DataContext,
    then doing all of your work in the child DataContext? Does that
    remove the need for using localObject, but still give you the
    flexibility to toss the child context objects?

    On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 11:11 AM, Michael Gentry <blacknex..mail.com> wrote:
    > OK, thanks. I wasn't certain of that by any means and am too buried
    > in other stuff to look it up.
    >
    > The pattern of using a dedicated DataContext for the small/cached
    > tables and using localObject to make joins to them would still apply,
    > though.
    >
    > mrg
    >
    >
    > On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 10:49 AM, Andrus Adamchik
    > <andru..bjectstyle.org> wrote:
    >>
    >> On Jun 30, 2008, at 5:45 PM, Michael Gentry wrote:
    >>
    >>> I think in Cayenne 3 that it'll automatically pull an object
    >>> into the DataContext if it exists in another DataContext.
    >>
    >> Not true. (well only true for transient unregistered objects). Generally you
    >> still need to use 'localObject'.
    >>
    >> Andrus
    >>
    >>
    >

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Mon Jun 30 2008 - 11:33:36 EDT