tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-984759404111508297.post3800548573957844984..comments2024-03-27T02:17:00.515-05:00Comments on WebSphere and Java Persistence: Dynamic Fetch PlanningKevin Sutterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03501598040442845034noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-984759404111508297.post-45867530516742086522021-11-18T08:37:18.239-06:002021-11-18T08:37:18.239-06:00Dear, I am for the first time, and I found benefic...Dear, I am for the first time, and I found beneficial information. Very nice and well-explained article. Thanks for sharing. <a href="https://cracksys.com/shadow-fight-2-cracked/" rel="nofollow">Shadow Fight 2 Cracked</a>crackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11648502990752836824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-984759404111508297.post-68252508456905775002014-11-24T10:48:18.168-06:002014-11-24T10:48:18.168-06:00Hi AJ,
What you seem to be describing should be do...Hi AJ,<br />What you seem to be describing should be doable with OpenJPA's fetch plans and/or fetch groups. You might want to reference the latest documentation to see if you can figure out what's different:<br /><br />http://ci.apache.org/projects/openjpa/trunk/docbook/manual.html#ref_guide_fetch <br /><br />One thing to watch out for is the use of the "default" fetch group versus a user-defined fetch group. It may be that you are accidentally falling back to the "default" fetch group.<br /><br />If none of this helps, then I would suggest posting to the OpenJPA users mailing list. Other users and/or developers may have some additional insights for you. And, if a problem is discovered, then a bug report can be opened.<br /><br />http://openjpa.apache.org/mailing-lists.html<br /><br />Good luck,<br />KevinKevin Sutterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03501598040442845034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-984759404111508297.post-45645541548216095082014-11-22T10:10:20.572-06:002014-11-22T10:10:20.572-06:00Hi,
I have a similar scenario. I need my entity ma...Hi,<br />I have a similar scenario. I need my entity manager operations like find and merge act differently. On my merge i have to merge the null, so i have the confifuration all(detachedState=true). So this made all my entities along with its childs to be loaded to memory. But on my selects( em.find()), i dont want all my childs to be retrived, just the root is sufficient. Tried with fecthplans, pushFechPlan, even with custom fetch groups. Fetch plans, does nt seem to be working. I could see the setMaxDepth, when dynamically change the fecthplan, has the value as 0 for em.find() and em.merge has infinites as expected(-1). But still when it fires SQL, i can see its loading all entities irrespective of setting the max depth to root.Any help on this will be appreciated.<br />Regards,<br />AJajhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08093383656504702404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-984759404111508297.post-85229122379581652082010-05-28T08:44:14.286-05:002010-05-28T08:44:14.286-05:00I think in the book POJOs in Action, the case is m...I think in the book POJOs in Action, the case is made pretty clear the need for fetch groups when in the perspective of a well design application.<br /><br />It's less clear from a laboratory perspective, from people writing small unit test to show their framework features.<br /><br />In the J2EE Patterns, Transfer Object Assembler is responsible to know what need to be available in the object tree. The assembler is far from the queries, many queries. <br /><br />In complex application a subset of queries will be involve by many different assemblers having different needs. They is not much other alternatives than DECLARING what need to be fetched in the assembler before calling indirectly an undefined number of queries hidden deep in the layers.Sebhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13989200831557567160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-984759404111508297.post-27315148163146454152009-03-12T08:42:00.000-05:002009-03-12T08:42:00.000-05:00Thanks for the comments. We like our Fetch Plan a...Thanks for the comments. We like our Fetch Plan and Fetch Group support as well... The idea of standardizing this support continues to come up during the JPA expert group discussions, but it just hasn't made the cut yet. Thanks for the feedback.Kevin Sutterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03501598040442845034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-984759404111508297.post-20849915552231544412009-03-12T00:40:00.000-05:002009-03-12T00:40:00.000-05:00Fetch Groups was the thing which got me interested...Fetch Groups was the thing which got me interested in looking at Open JPA as an alternative to Hibernate. As far as I remember, the request for similar feature has been raise a couple of times on hibernate forum and turned down. I am really disappointed that it is not a part of JPA 2.0 spec. In most of my project, marking the associations as lazy or eager has become an architectural decision, Fetch Group now makes it very simple and use case specific instead of design.NimitZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06909658601206425013noreply@blogger.com