Hi Guillaume, Can you please check the behavior of with the Javassist enhancer in this particular case? I believe it's the correct one, but one has to double check.
Also, on a related issue, please check the comments I made on https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/HHH-12593 about property access. I think we need to sort out both aspects, the interception and enhancing as mapped collection, in order to support this case properly. The former is a bug but for the latter I don't see a good enough solution. Let me know what you find so we can proceed on solving this out. Regards, Luis Barreiro Middleware Performance Team <https://red.ht/sig> On 06/11/2018 06:34 PM, Guillaume Smet wrote: > Hi Luis, > > This question is related to > https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/HHH-12601 . > > AFAICS, the following case (e.g. having the fields defined in the > parent class and the laziness defined in the child class) is not > working very well with bytecode enhancement: > ==== > @Entity > public class RequestWithLazyEvents extends RelatedToEvents { > > @ManyToMany(fetch = FetchType.LAZY) > @Fetch(FetchMode.SELECT) > public Set<Event> getEvents() { > return events; > } > } > > @MappedSuperclass > public abstract class RelatedToEvents extends Base { > protected Set<Event> events = new LinkedHashSet<>(); > > public void setEvents(Set<Event> events) { > this.events = events; > } > } > ==== > > By not working very well, I mean that the interceptor read/write > methods are defined in the child class but the getters and setters are > not intercepted because we only intercept the getters/setters if the > fields are defined in the current class: > > See this method in PersistentAttributeTransformer and especially the > last test: > ==== > private boolean isEnhanced(String owner, String name, String desc) { > for ( FieldDescription enhancedField : enhancedFields ) { > if ( enhancedField.getName().equals( name ) > && enhancedField.getDescriptor().equals( desc ) > && > enhancedField.getDeclaringType().asErasure().getInternalName().equals( > owner ) ) { > return true; > } > } > return false; > } > ==== > > (Note that supporting this case is not only a matter of removing the test) > > I don't know if it's a case we want to support or not but I'm a bit > worried that we don't throw any error and the collection is not loaded > at all (as the rest of ORM supposes the enhancer will do the work). > > You end up saving the collection in the database and when you get it > back the collection is always empty. > > It can lead to serious data loss if you save the entity back to the > database thus I think it's somewhat critical to fix it. > > WDYT? > > -- > Guillaume _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
