|Re: Using cache-coordination across different eclipselink version [message #1723222 is a reply to message #1722862]
||Fri, 12 February 2016 15:08
| Thom Park
Registered: June 2012
Thanks for the reply Chris - I appreciate it.|
The 2.2 based app is mired (and I use that work intentionally) in it's use of the old Toplink v1 API. All of the (very many) Entities have ValueHolderInterface definitions to support the non-transparent one-to-many relationships on the system.
Were it not for this, we could certainly move the newer apps on to 2.6 and JPA. However, because a non-JPA entity has ValueHolders and the JPA-based entities would not have ValueHolders defined in the entity, I'm at a loss to move my app to 2.6 and JPA without having to rewrite everything that shares the common database an entity sets.
If you have any experience in sharing v1 based entities with JPA based entities (I understand that ValueHolders still get weaved in behind the scenes in JPA) I'm curious if an entity called com.foo.bar.Company that's defined with Valueholders in one application would be compatible with a similarly named entity in the other application but lacking Valuholders in the entity definition (due to the use of JPA annotations).
Would the objects 'look' the same as far as a distributed cache is concerned - i.e. in the cache of the JPA app, would the object hold a collection of entities, or would it hold a value holder?
Hmm. I've deviated quite a bit from the topic - maybe I should repost as a different question.
[Updated on: Fri, 12 February 2016 15:09]
Report message to a moderator
Powered by FUDForum
. Page generated in 0.02046 seconds