On Sep 27, 2006, at 12:02 AM, Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
you mean a standard version of optimistick-lock="false"?
That too.
___
hibernate-dev mailing list
hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
On Sep 26, 2006, at 10:20 PM, Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
I confirm what I said. I added a testcase to HEM.
Here is the most accurate thing I can find from the spec
I took it out of the book until this is clear and stable. By the way,
another major thing missing in the spec is standardized ver
you mean a standard version of optimistick-lock="false"?
Christian Bauer wrote:
On Sep 26, 2006, at 10:20 PM, Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
I confirm what I said. I added a testcase to HEM.
Here is the most accurate thing I can find from the spec
I took it out of the book until this is clear an
I confirm what I said. I added a testcase to HEM.
Here is the most accurate thing I can find from the spec
3.4.2 Version Attributes
[...]
The persistence provider's implementation of the merge operation must
examine the version attribute
when an entity is being merged and throw an OptimisticL
Hi,
The challenge is that both have merit.
The first one (dirty merge + dirty attached = exception) is more correct
from a consistency perspective.
The second one (dirty merge + dirty attached = dirty merge wins) wins is
(probably) usefull in many practical cases (and works like I think most
