You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openjpa.apache.org by "Jerry Carter (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2010/04/21 17:11:53 UTC
[jira] Created: (OPENJPA-1636) Updates to an @ElementCollection are
not alway caught
Updates to an @ElementCollection are not alway caught
-----------------------------------------------------
Key: OPENJPA-1636
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-1636
Project: OpenJPA
Issue Type: Bug
Affects Versions: 2.0.0-beta3
Environment: Spring 3.0.1, Mac OS X 10.6
Reporter: Jerry Carter
As part of a complex project, I have a class 'Child' inherited from 'Parent' (i.e. InheritanceType.JOINED). Within 'Child' are two @ElementCollection fields. Under some circumstances, updates to these fields are ignored by the EntityManager BUT it is not yet clear exactly what is triggering this behavior.
This one works:
Child child = em.find(Child.class, 3071151);
em.detach(child);
child.setName("Test Update In Place - Update B");
Collection<ChildNote> notes = child.getNotes();
ChildNote note = new ChildNote("Note B");
notes.add(note);
child.setNotes(notes);
em.merge(.updateLocality(loc);
SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
DELETE FROM child_notes WHERE child_ref = ?
UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update B, (int) 3, (long) 3071151, (int) 2]
INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note A]
INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note B]
Here you can see the SELECT to populate the record. On the merge, the old 'child_notes' associated with the record are deleted and the values repopulated. All is good. But in the very next test, I delete a note:
Child child = em.find(Child.class, 3071151);
em.detach(child);
child.setName("Test Update In Place - Update C");
Collection<ChildNote> notes = child.getNotes();
Iterator<ChildNote> i = child.iterator();
ChildNote eliminateMe = i.next();
notes.remove(eliminateMe);
// child.setNotes(null); // TODO: Workaround for OPENJPA-xxxx
child.setNotes(notes);
em.merge(.updateLocality(loc);
SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update C, (int) 4, (long) 3071151, (int) 3]
This is the same sequence of operations, save for a note being removed as opposed to added. Here the 'child_notes' are not cleared and repopulated! Adding the 'child.setNotes(null)' call, however, restores the correct behavior.
SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
DELETE FROM child_notes WHERE child_ref = ?
UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update C, (int) 4, (long) 3071151, (int) 3]
INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note A]
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Closed: (OPENJPA-1636) Updates to an @ElementCollection are
not alway caught
Posted by "Donald Woods (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-1636?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Donald Woods closed OPENJPA-1636.
---------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 2.0.0
Resolution: Duplicate
Fixed by OPENJPA-1597
> Updates to an @ElementCollection are not alway caught
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OPENJPA-1636
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-1636
> Project: OpenJPA
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.0.0-beta3
> Environment: Spring 3.0.1, Mac OS X 10.6
> Reporter: Jerry Carter
> Fix For: 2.0.0
>
>
> As part of a complex project, I have a class 'Child' inherited from 'Parent' (i.e. InheritanceType.JOINED). Within 'Child' are two @ElementCollection fields. Under some circumstances, updates to these fields are ignored by the EntityManager BUT it is not yet clear exactly what is triggering this behavior.
> This one works:
> Child child = em.find(Child.class, 3071151);
> em.detach(child);
> child.setName("Test Update In Place - Update B");
> Collection<ChildNote> notes = child.getNotes();
> ChildNote note = new ChildNote("Note B");
> notes.add(note);
> child.setNotes(notes);
> em.merge(.updateLocality(loc);
>
> SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
> DELETE FROM child_notes WHERE child_ref = ?
> UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update B, (int) 3, (long) 3071151, (int) 2]
> INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note A]
> INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note B]
> Here you can see the SELECT to populate the record. On the merge, the old 'child_notes' associated with the record are deleted and the values repopulated. All is good. But in the very next test, I delete a note:
> Child child = em.find(Child.class, 3071151);
> em.detach(child);
> child.setName("Test Update In Place - Update C");
> Collection<ChildNote> notes = child.getNotes();
> Iterator<ChildNote> i = child.iterator();
> ChildNote eliminateMe = i.next();
> notes.remove(eliminateMe);
> // child.setNotes(null); // TODO: Workaround for OPENJPA-xxxx
> child.setNotes(notes);
> em.merge(.updateLocality(loc);
> SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
> UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update C, (int) 4, (long) 3071151, (int) 3]
> This is the same sequence of operations, save for a note being removed as opposed to added. Here the 'child_notes' are not cleared and repopulated! Adding the 'child.setNotes(null)' call, however, restores the correct behavior.
> SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
> DELETE FROM child_notes WHERE child_ref = ?
> UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update C, (int) 4, (long) 3071151, (int) 3]
> INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note A]
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Commented: (OPENJPA-1636) Updates to an @ElementCollection
are not alway caught
Posted by "Jerry Carter (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-1636?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12859424#action_12859424 ]
Jerry Carter commented on OPENJPA-1636:
---------------------------------------
NOTE: I see the correct behavior in the 2.0.0 build. I've walked through the 33 issues fixed between 2.0.0-beta3 and 2.0.0, but none of the fixes seem to relate to this.
> Updates to an @ElementCollection are not alway caught
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OPENJPA-1636
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-1636
> Project: OpenJPA
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.0.0-beta3
> Environment: Spring 3.0.1, Mac OS X 10.6
> Reporter: Jerry Carter
>
> As part of a complex project, I have a class 'Child' inherited from 'Parent' (i.e. InheritanceType.JOINED). Within 'Child' are two @ElementCollection fields. Under some circumstances, updates to these fields are ignored by the EntityManager BUT it is not yet clear exactly what is triggering this behavior.
> This one works:
> Child child = em.find(Child.class, 3071151);
> em.detach(child);
> child.setName("Test Update In Place - Update B");
> Collection<ChildNote> notes = child.getNotes();
> ChildNote note = new ChildNote("Note B");
> notes.add(note);
> child.setNotes(notes);
> em.merge(.updateLocality(loc);
>
> SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
> DELETE FROM child_notes WHERE child_ref = ?
> UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update B, (int) 3, (long) 3071151, (int) 2]
> INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note A]
> INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note B]
> Here you can see the SELECT to populate the record. On the merge, the old 'child_notes' associated with the record are deleted and the values repopulated. All is good. But in the very next test, I delete a note:
> Child child = em.find(Child.class, 3071151);
> em.detach(child);
> child.setName("Test Update In Place - Update C");
> Collection<ChildNote> notes = child.getNotes();
> Iterator<ChildNote> i = child.iterator();
> ChildNote eliminateMe = i.next();
> notes.remove(eliminateMe);
> // child.setNotes(null); // TODO: Workaround for OPENJPA-xxxx
> child.setNotes(notes);
> em.merge(.updateLocality(loc);
> SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
> UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update C, (int) 4, (long) 3071151, (int) 3]
> This is the same sequence of operations, save for a note being removed as opposed to added. Here the 'child_notes' are not cleared and repopulated! Adding the 'child.setNotes(null)' call, however, restores the correct behavior.
> SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
> DELETE FROM child_notes WHERE child_ref = ?
> UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update C, (int) 4, (long) 3071151, (int) 3]
> INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note A]
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Commented: (OPENJPA-1636) Updates to an @ElementCollection
are not alway caught
Posted by "Donald Woods (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-1636?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12859455#action_12859455 ]
Donald Woods commented on OPENJPA-1636:
---------------------------------------
1597 was used to remove some of the changes made in 1097 (like forcing the $proxy classes to be removed when entities were detached which broke collections as in your case). It was also used to add a new Compatibility setting so JPA 1.0 apps would use the old OpenJPA 1.x serialization behavior and allow JPA 2.0 apps to revert back to the old behavior if needed.
> Updates to an @ElementCollection are not alway caught
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OPENJPA-1636
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-1636
> Project: OpenJPA
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.0.0-beta3
> Environment: Spring 3.0.1, Mac OS X 10.6
> Reporter: Jerry Carter
> Fix For: 2.0.0
>
>
> As part of a complex project, I have a class 'Child' inherited from 'Parent' (i.e. InheritanceType.JOINED). Within 'Child' are two @ElementCollection fields. Under some circumstances, updates to these fields are ignored by the EntityManager BUT it is not yet clear exactly what is triggering this behavior.
> This one works:
> Child child = em.find(Child.class, 3071151);
> em.detach(child);
> child.setName("Test Update In Place - Update B");
> Collection<ChildNote> notes = child.getNotes();
> ChildNote note = new ChildNote("Note B");
> notes.add(note);
> child.setNotes(notes);
> em.merge(.updateLocality(loc);
>
> SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
> DELETE FROM child_notes WHERE child_ref = ?
> UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update B, (int) 3, (long) 3071151, (int) 2]
> INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note A]
> INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note B]
> Here you can see the SELECT to populate the record. On the merge, the old 'child_notes' associated with the record are deleted and the values repopulated. All is good. But in the very next test, I delete a note:
> Child child = em.find(Child.class, 3071151);
> em.detach(child);
> child.setName("Test Update In Place - Update C");
> Collection<ChildNote> notes = child.getNotes();
> Iterator<ChildNote> i = child.iterator();
> ChildNote eliminateMe = i.next();
> notes.remove(eliminateMe);
> // child.setNotes(null); // TODO: Workaround for OPENJPA-xxxx
> child.setNotes(notes);
> em.merge(.updateLocality(loc);
> SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
> UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update C, (int) 4, (long) 3071151, (int) 3]
> This is the same sequence of operations, save for a note being removed as opposed to added. Here the 'child_notes' are not cleared and repopulated! Adding the 'child.setNotes(null)' call, however, restores the correct behavior.
> SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
> DELETE FROM child_notes WHERE child_ref = ?
> UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update C, (int) 4, (long) 3071151, (int) 3]
> INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note A]
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Commented: (OPENJPA-1636) Updates to an @ElementCollection
are not alway caught
Posted by "Jerry Carter (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-1636?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12859447#action_12859447 ]
Jerry Carter commented on OPENJPA-1636:
---------------------------------------
That would be wonderful news but are you sure? If I read the logs correctly, OPENJPA-1097 went into 2.0.0-beta3 which is most definitely broken.
> Updates to an @ElementCollection are not alway caught
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OPENJPA-1636
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-1636
> Project: OpenJPA
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.0.0-beta3
> Environment: Spring 3.0.1, Mac OS X 10.6
> Reporter: Jerry Carter
> Fix For: 2.0.0
>
>
> As part of a complex project, I have a class 'Child' inherited from 'Parent' (i.e. InheritanceType.JOINED). Within 'Child' are two @ElementCollection fields. Under some circumstances, updates to these fields are ignored by the EntityManager BUT it is not yet clear exactly what is triggering this behavior.
> This one works:
> Child child = em.find(Child.class, 3071151);
> em.detach(child);
> child.setName("Test Update In Place - Update B");
> Collection<ChildNote> notes = child.getNotes();
> ChildNote note = new ChildNote("Note B");
> notes.add(note);
> child.setNotes(notes);
> em.merge(.updateLocality(loc);
>
> SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
> DELETE FROM child_notes WHERE child_ref = ?
> UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update B, (int) 3, (long) 3071151, (int) 2]
> INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note A]
> INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note B]
> Here you can see the SELECT to populate the record. On the merge, the old 'child_notes' associated with the record are deleted and the values repopulated. All is good. But in the very next test, I delete a note:
> Child child = em.find(Child.class, 3071151);
> em.detach(child);
> child.setName("Test Update In Place - Update C");
> Collection<ChildNote> notes = child.getNotes();
> Iterator<ChildNote> i = child.iterator();
> ChildNote eliminateMe = i.next();
> notes.remove(eliminateMe);
> // child.setNotes(null); // TODO: Workaround for OPENJPA-xxxx
> child.setNotes(notes);
> em.merge(.updateLocality(loc);
> SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
> UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update C, (int) 4, (long) 3071151, (int) 3]
> This is the same sequence of operations, save for a note being removed as opposed to added. Here the 'child_notes' are not cleared and repopulated! Adding the 'child.setNotes(null)' call, however, restores the correct behavior.
> SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
> DELETE FROM child_notes WHERE child_ref = ?
> UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update C, (int) 4, (long) 3071151, (int) 3]
> INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note A]
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Commented: (OPENJPA-1636) Updates to an @ElementCollection
are not alway caught
Posted by "Jerry Carter (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-1636?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12859448#action_12859448 ]
Jerry Carter commented on OPENJPA-1636:
---------------------------------------
Oops. I read the wrong issue. I see that OPENJPA-1597 went in later. Thanks much.
> Updates to an @ElementCollection are not alway caught
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OPENJPA-1636
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-1636
> Project: OpenJPA
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.0.0-beta3
> Environment: Spring 3.0.1, Mac OS X 10.6
> Reporter: Jerry Carter
> Fix For: 2.0.0
>
>
> As part of a complex project, I have a class 'Child' inherited from 'Parent' (i.e. InheritanceType.JOINED). Within 'Child' are two @ElementCollection fields. Under some circumstances, updates to these fields are ignored by the EntityManager BUT it is not yet clear exactly what is triggering this behavior.
> This one works:
> Child child = em.find(Child.class, 3071151);
> em.detach(child);
> child.setName("Test Update In Place - Update B");
> Collection<ChildNote> notes = child.getNotes();
> ChildNote note = new ChildNote("Note B");
> notes.add(note);
> child.setNotes(notes);
> em.merge(.updateLocality(loc);
>
> SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
> DELETE FROM child_notes WHERE child_ref = ?
> UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update B, (int) 3, (long) 3071151, (int) 2]
> INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note A]
> INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note B]
> Here you can see the SELECT to populate the record. On the merge, the old 'child_notes' associated with the record are deleted and the values repopulated. All is good. But in the very next test, I delete a note:
> Child child = em.find(Child.class, 3071151);
> em.detach(child);
> child.setName("Test Update In Place - Update C");
> Collection<ChildNote> notes = child.getNotes();
> Iterator<ChildNote> i = child.iterator();
> ChildNote eliminateMe = i.next();
> notes.remove(eliminateMe);
> // child.setNotes(null); // TODO: Workaround for OPENJPA-xxxx
> child.setNotes(notes);
> em.merge(.updateLocality(loc);
> SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
> UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update C, (int) 4, (long) 3071151, (int) 3]
> This is the same sequence of operations, save for a note being removed as opposed to added. Here the 'child_notes' are not cleared and repopulated! Adding the 'child.setNotes(null)' call, however, restores the correct behavior.
> SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
> DELETE FROM child_notes WHERE child_ref = ?
> UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update C, (int) 4, (long) 3071151, (int) 3]
> INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note A]
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Commented: (OPENJPA-1636) Updates to an @ElementCollection
are not alway caught
Posted by "Donald Woods (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-1636?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12859444#action_12859444 ]
Donald Woods commented on OPENJPA-1636:
---------------------------------------
It's probably related to the OPENJPA-1097 changes in Beta3, which I fixed using OPENJPA-1597 in 2.0.0.
Glad to hear that your problem went away with the final 2.0.0 code.
> Updates to an @ElementCollection are not alway caught
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OPENJPA-1636
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-1636
> Project: OpenJPA
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.0.0-beta3
> Environment: Spring 3.0.1, Mac OS X 10.6
> Reporter: Jerry Carter
>
> As part of a complex project, I have a class 'Child' inherited from 'Parent' (i.e. InheritanceType.JOINED). Within 'Child' are two @ElementCollection fields. Under some circumstances, updates to these fields are ignored by the EntityManager BUT it is not yet clear exactly what is triggering this behavior.
> This one works:
> Child child = em.find(Child.class, 3071151);
> em.detach(child);
> child.setName("Test Update In Place - Update B");
> Collection<ChildNote> notes = child.getNotes();
> ChildNote note = new ChildNote("Note B");
> notes.add(note);
> child.setNotes(notes);
> em.merge(.updateLocality(loc);
>
> SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
> DELETE FROM child_notes WHERE child_ref = ?
> UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update B, (int) 3, (long) 3071151, (int) 2]
> INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note A]
> INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note B]
> Here you can see the SELECT to populate the record. On the merge, the old 'child_notes' associated with the record are deleted and the values repopulated. All is good. But in the very next test, I delete a note:
> Child child = em.find(Child.class, 3071151);
> em.detach(child);
> child.setName("Test Update In Place - Update C");
> Collection<ChildNote> notes = child.getNotes();
> Iterator<ChildNote> i = child.iterator();
> ChildNote eliminateMe = i.next();
> notes.remove(eliminateMe);
> // child.setNotes(null); // TODO: Workaround for OPENJPA-xxxx
> child.setNotes(notes);
> em.merge(.updateLocality(loc);
> SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
> UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update C, (int) 4, (long) 3071151, (int) 3]
> This is the same sequence of operations, save for a note being removed as opposed to added. Here the 'child_notes' are not cleared and repopulated! Adding the 'child.setNotes(null)' call, however, restores the correct behavior.
> SELECT ... FROM child_data t0 INNER JOIN parent_data t1 ON t0.id = t1.id LEFT OUTER JOIN child_notes t2 ON t0.id = t2.child_ref WHERE t0.id = ?
> DELETE FROM child_notes WHERE child_ref = ?
> UPDATE parent_data SET name = ?, version = ? WHERE id = ? AND version = ? [params=(String) Test Update In Place - Update C, (int) 4, (long) 3071151, (int) 3]
> INSERT INTO child_notes (child_ref, note) VALUES (?, ?) [params=(long) 3071151, (String) Note A]
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.