see http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/HibernateCore400CR7Release for more details
-
Best Regards,
Strong Liu
http://about.me/stliu/bio
___
hibernate-dev mailing list
hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman
Well, I would vote for making things simple, and leaving InExpression as
it is. BTW passing more than 1000 elements in IN clause sounds evil :).
Regards,
Lukasz
___
hibernate-dev mailing list
hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman
Splitting is not always an option. Consider a predicate like:
... where a in (x1, ... x2000) and b in (y1, ... y2000) ...
If you split this up, you will have misses. Yes, it works if you can
keep it all in one query because you can structure it to maintain the
original semantics. However, pl
> Well a long term solution is to move to resultset value extraction based on
> position rather than name. Which I believe we should do, but it wont happen
> any time soon. That would actually fix this problem.
Yes, but you would still have the problem then for auto discovered scalar
queries
Well a long term solution is to move to resultset value extraction
based on position rather than name. Which I believe we should do, but
it wont happen any time soon. That would actually fix this problem.
On Wed 30 Nov 2011 10:57:31 AM CST, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
>
> On Nov 30, 2011, at 1
On Nov 30, 2011, at 15:22, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> Not sure when you sent this out, but I already fixed this (my) yeasterday.
> The only real option, IMO, is to throw an exception. As long as we are tied
> to pulling resultset values based on column name this is going to be a
> situation tha
I am working on this one. Was going to use the opportunity to clean up
some things in the LockingStrategy hierarchy and its users.
On Wed 30 Nov 2011 08:01:11 AM CST, Gail Badner wrote:
> I created a pull request for HHH-6865.
>
> IMO, this should be fixed for the next CR.
>
> https://hibernate.
Thanks for your response. Yes it is multi-tenency however that's just
1 filter of the 8 we have. We use it for more than just that. For
example, within a single customer, there are object visibility
permissions based on a complex interaction between roles and a tree
with inheritance. Whether or
What you are doing is called multi-tenancy.
Hibernate 4 has more explicit support for multi-tenant data.
Unfortunately 4.0 only supports cases where the schema is replicated on
multiple databases/schemas. There will also be support for
discrimination-based multi-tenancy at some point in 4.x (
Not sure when you sent this out, but I already fixed this (my)
yeasterday. The only real option, IMO, is to throw an exception. As
long as we are tied to pulling resultset values based on column name
this is going to be a situation that we simply cannot reasonably
support. Modifying the sql
I created a pull request for HHH-6865.
IMO, this should be fixed for the next CR.
https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/HHH-6865
https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-core/pull/232
Please take a look and merge if it looks OK.
Thanks,
Gail
___
hibernate
Also note that there is a limit for the query size globally in some vendors and
that people relieved from HHH-1123 cal fall into the second limit.
A solution would be for Hibernate to split one query into several but I'm not
sure I like the idea.
Emmanuel
On 29 nov. 2011, at 21:29, Łukasz Anton
12 matches
Mail list logo
