If I understand correctly you are thinking there is a case where the "PU name" would not be unique for a given app? That is the only time I can see this being a concern. If it is possible that the same app can have different PU names on different nodes in the cluster then simply using PU name as EMF name wont work there. But pretty sure I said that this will need to allow explicitly setting of the EMF name.
But regardless UUID will never work in a cluster. Thats been covered a few times here. UUID is merely a fallback which assumes ser and deser happen in the same VM. On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Scott Marlow <smar...@redhat.com> wrote: > It wouldn't be difficult to switch back to using UUIDs in the EMF. Neither > way is perfect (see discussion on HHH-6897). > > > > On 02/08/2012 08:28 AM, Steve Ebersole wrote: >> >> On 02/08/2012 04:23 AM, Christian Bauer wrote: >>> >>> (For whatever reason, I still don't understand why EMF clustering would >>> be different than SF clustering.) >> >> >> This is exactly the point I am missing here as well. >> > _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
