Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [eclipselink-users] merge() cascading by default?

I think this is correct.

merge() and persist() are different operations.  Merge is merging from one
detached copy of the object, into a managed object, if something is not
cascade merge, it just doesn't need to merge that attribute.  For persist
the new object is being made managed (itself, not a copy), so has to resolve
all of its references.

However, I would expect the relation to just not be merged, not to be
inserted.  Is the object you are merging new or existing?  How are the new
object relations that are inserted mapped?  Perhaps include some example

cowwoc wrote:
> Here is the output I see with logging enabled.
> I hope file attachments works with nabble :)
> good.txt refers to the output I expect. bad.txt refers to the unexpected
> cascade.
> good.txt 
> bad.txt 
> Gili
> cowwoc wrote:
>> When I merge() an Image object, EclipseLink seems to persist all objects
>> referenced by the object. If I change to persist() it complains that one
>> of the referenced object was transient but not cascaded.
>> I am expecting the same warning to be issued for merge(). The
>> documentation says that the default cascade is none but the behavior
>> seems otherwise. I am using EclipseLink 1.0.1.
>> Thank you,
>> Gili

--- James Sutherland
 EclipseLink ,
Wiki: EclipseLink , TopLink 
Forums: TopLink , EclipseLink 
Book: Java Persistence 
View this message in context:
Sent from the EclipseLink - Users mailing list archive at

Back to the top