Re: [eclipselink-dev] bug 340329 - table creation prefix

[Tom Ware <tom.ware@xxxxxxxxxx>]

What would a typical prefix be?  Is there just one you are thinking of, or is 
there a list of possible prefixes?

I am trying to get an understanding about why we are addressing this a String 
prefix instead of as a DatabasePlatform setting or as a DatabasePlatform 
subclass.  Some examples might help.

Thanks,
Tom

Xiang, Xu wrote:
> Hi Tom,
>
> you are right. The "prefix" wil replace "CREATE TABLE". I didn't find a
> better word.
> On the other hand internally EclipseLink uses "prefix" already for create
> temporary table. Therefore it is not MaxDB specific.
>
> Best regards
> Xu
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Ware [mailto:tom.ware@xxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Montag, 28. März 2011 16:55
> To: Dev mailing list for Eclipse Persistence Services
> Cc: christopher.delahunt@xxxxxxxxxx; Xiang, Xu; Singer, Reiner
> Subject: Re: [eclipselink-dev] bug 340329 - table creation prefix
>
> What would a typical prefix be?  (is it really a prefix, or a replacement
> for 
> "CREATE TABLE"?  Is PREFIX the right terminology?)
>
> When would someone choose to use a prefix?  Is this a MAXDB specific thing?
>
> -Tom
>
> Goerler, Adrian wrote:
> > Hi Chris, others,
> >
> >  
> >
> > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=340329
> >
> >  
> >
> > we got the requirement to allow overriding the CREATE TABLE keywords in 
> > DDL in a table-specific way to leverage special database features. Xu 
> > has proposed to introduce a creation-prefix attribute to the 
> > table-mappings of eclipselink-orm.xml - analogously to 
> > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=214519. Please find 
> > attached a revised proposal including test for this enhancement.
> >
> >  
> >
> > I you are OK with this feature, I would go ahead and check it in.
> >
> >  
> >
> > -Adrian
> >
> >  
> >
> > PS.
> >
> >  
> >
> > Alternatively, I could consider to specify additional requirements on 
> > the DDL using @Properties/@Property annotations. Then, one could add 
> >  hese properties to the TableDefinition, redirect rendering of CREATE 
> > TABLE statements to the DatabasePlatform and render the statement in a 
> > database-vendor specific way according to the properties recognized by 
> > the vendor.
> >
> >  
> >
> > E.g.:
> >
> >  
> >
> >  
> >
> > @Table(name=”MY_TABLE”)
> >
> > @Property(“mysql.jdbc.engine”, “InnoDB”)
> >
> > @Entity
> >
> > Public class MyEntity
> >
> >  
> >
> > This, however, would obsolete the creation-suffix just introduced in 2.2 
> > ;-).
> >
> >  
> >
> >  
> >
> >  
> >
> > *Adrian Görler
> > **SAP AG
> >
> > *Pflichtangaben/Mandatory Disclosure Statements:
> > http://www.sap.com/company/legal/impressum.epx
> >
> >  
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > eclipselink-dev mailing list
> > eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev