Fwd: [Issue 154] New - EJBQL: bulk UPDATE statement should not update version columns

[Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>]

Interesting anomaly with object relational mapping query language  
update semantics. Apparently, it's not too useful with versioned  
classes using optimistic concurrency.

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Peter Krogh <pe...@oracle.com>
> Date: January 16, 2006 6:51:52 AM PST
> To: "persistence@glassfish.dev.java.net"  
> <pe...@glassfish.dev.java.net>
> Cc: "Michael.Bouschen@Sun.COM" <Mi...@sun.com>
> Subject: RE: [Issue 154] New - EJBQL: bulk UPDATE statement should  
> not update version columns
> Reply-To: persistence@glassfish.dev.java.net
>
> I imagine the reason why this was removed from the spec is because  
> of the row count.  How do you know if you should throw an  
> optimistic lock exception since you don't know how many objects  
> were modified?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Craig.Russell@Sun.COM [mailto:Craig.Russell@Sun.COM]On Behalf  
> Of Craig L Russell
> Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 8:25 PM
> To: persistence@glassfish.dev.java.net
> Cc: Michael.Bouschen@Sun.COM
> Subject: Re: [Issue 154] New - EJBQL: bulk UPDATE statement should  
> not update version columns
>
> Hi,
>
> I'd suggest waiting to hear from the spec lead(s) before doing  
> anything with this bug report. I understand that this is a spec bug.
>
> Craig
>
> On Jan 13, 2006, at 12:11 PM, Marina Vatkina wrote:
>
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> Isn't the spec requirement wrong? While it might be
>> tricky to update version column of all tables, if
>> bulk update doesn't do it, any parallel tx can override the changes.
>>
>> thanks,
>> -marina
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: mb124283@dev.java.net
>> Date: Friday, January 13, 2006 11:11 am
>> Subject: [Issue 154] New - EJBQL: bulk UPDATE statement should not  
>> update version columns
>>
>>> https://glassfish.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=154
>>> Issue #|154
>>> Summary|EJBQL: bulk UPDATE statement should not
>>> update version
>>> | columns
>>> Component|glassfish
>>> Version|9.0pe
>>> Platform|All
>>> OS/Version|All
>>> URL|
>>> Status|NEW
>>> Status whiteboard|
>>> Keywords|
>>> Resolution|
>>> Issue type|TASK
>>> Priority|P3
>>> Subcomponent|entity-persistence
>>> Assigned to|tware
>>> Reported by|mb124283
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------- Additional comments from mb124283@dev.java.net Fri Jan 13
>>> 19:11:47 +0000 2006 -------
>>> The PFD version of the EJB3 persistence spec clarifies that an
>>> EJBQL bulk UPDATE
>>> statement does not update version columns.
>>>
>>> Today the EJBQL query
>>> UPDATE Customer c SET c.name = 'CHANGED'
>>> is mapped to the following SQL:
>>> UPDATE CMP3_CUSTOMER
>>> SET NAME = 'CHANGED', CUST_VERSION = (CUST_VERSION + 1)
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@glassfish.dev.java.net
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@glassfish.dev.java.net
>>>
>>>
>
> Craig Russell
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!