Re: Different DataContext

From: Mike Kienenberger (mkienen..mail.com)
Date: Wed Jul 22 2009 - 10:18:50 EDT

  • Next message: Aristedes Maniatis: "Travel to ApacheCon US 2009"

    To assign relationships between objects, they have to be in the same
    context. As Emanuele stated, it's hard to say what the best practice
    for wicket is since we haven't used it.

    In my web applications, I have typically either used a new DataContext
    per request, or reused the same DataContext for the lifetime of the
    session. It will depend on your needs. Sometimes I have created a
    "read-only" shared DataContext to store data that never or rarely
    changes, and then used localObject to copy a reference of that static
    data into my non-read-only DataContext.

    On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Reinout van Schouwen<reinou..mail.com> wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > 2009/7/22 Mike Kienenberger <mkienen..mail.com>:
    >> If you know that Person is not in a modified state, you can make a
    >> local copy of Person in your nameObj's data context.
    >
    > Thanks, Mike and Emanuele, getting the object context from the nameObj
    > indeed solves the problem.
    >
    > Is this something to be aware of at all times? I.e. when creating a
    > link between two objects, is it best practice to retrieve the
    > datacontext from either one, and handle both objects from that
    > context?
    >
    > --
    > Reinout van Schouwen
    > http://vanschouwen.info/
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Wed Jul 22 2009 - 10:34:44 EDT