Hi,
This Hibernate forum question provides a good point:
https://discourse.hibernate.org/t/hibernate-in-weblogic-has-a-conflicting-antlr-version-what-to-do/189
Frameworks like EclipseLink and Spring (
https://twitter.com/starbuxman/status/960854907854249986 ) repackage
dependencies to avoid the
Gunnar -
I don't particularly see a reason why we cannot as it seems we're
handling the CALLBACK mode with no BV provider present earlier in the
code path. I'm fine changing it.
Chris
On 02/04/2018 07:21 AM, Gunnar Morling wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If the JPA validation mode is set to CALLBACK, BV cons
Repackaging, shading, etc.. are all a nightmare for supporting the
library down the road so we'd strongly prefer against doing such
things.
For users it's a nightmare as well when it comes to debug things, as
it breaks all tools such as having your IDE download the matching
sources for stacktraces,
I started writing the same response but I'll simply +1 Sanne's excellent
reply
On Tue, Feb 6, 2018, 7:35 AM Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> Repackaging, shading, etc.. are all a nightmare for supporting the
> library down the road so we'd strongly prefer against doing such
> things.
> For users it's a
The reasoning is that the 2 BV modes you mention make no mention of also
applying constraints to the database. It would be surprising for that to
happen. I can see the argument for AUTO, but absolutely not for CALLBACK.
Also important is the distinction that hibernate accepts multivalued
validat
Thaks Sanne,
Can you add your response to the Hibernate forum?
Maybe the forum question will be indexed by Google and other people will
benefit from your answer.
Vlad
On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 3:36 PM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> I started writing the same response but I'll simply +1 Sanne's excelle
2018-02-06 14:41 GMT+01:00 Steve Ebersole :
> The reasoning is that the 2 BV modes you mention make no mention of also
> applying constraints to the database. It would be surprising for that to
> happen. I can see the argument for AUTO, but absolutely not for CALLBACK.
>
I think that a) "trigger
Thanks for starting this, great ideas.
We should start exploring such options but I am thinking of some more
limitations that we'll have to overcome. To keep the discussion from
getting hopelessly complex, let's try to clarify the purpose:
The goal is to solve two problems which are strongly rela
On 02/06/2018 02:55 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> Thanks for starting this, great ideas.
>
> We should start exploring such options but I am thinking of some more
> limitations that we'll have to overcome. To keep the discussion from
> getting hopelessly complex, let's try to clarify the purpose:
>
I'm not sure I would call them separate. They are clearly linked. Look at
it this way, if we export various "validation" constraints to the database
(DDL) it is, practically speaking, a performance overhead to also perform
those checks in memory. Right? This is, I think, the distinction you may be
On 6 February 2018 at 14:46, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> I'm not sure I would call them separate. They are clearly linked. Look at
> it this way, if we export various "validation" constraints to the database
> (DDL) it is, practically speaking, a performance overhead to also perform
> those checks in
On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 9:18 AM Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> On 6 February 2018 at 14:46, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> > I'm not sure I would call them separate. They are clearly linked. Look at
> > it this way, if we export various "validation" constraints to the
> database
> > (DDL) it is, practically s
On 6 February 2018 at 15:34, Steve Ebersole wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 9:18 AM Sanne Grinovero wrote:
>>
>> On 6 February 2018 at 14:46, Steve Ebersole wrote:
>> > I'm not sure I would call them separate. They are clearly linked. Look
>> > at
>> > it this way, if we export various "vali
My question essentially is why is it alright to piggy-back the enablement
of the DDL constraint export on JPA's validation mode option (which only
has been designed with the lifecycle validation in mind) for AUTO but not
for CALLBACK?
It causes a few issues: When using CALLBACK (which is the right
Done, and since the conflict was ANTLR 2 vs ANTLR 3 it might be much
simpler to resolve as there is no conflict ;)
-
https://discourse.hibernate.org/t/hibernate-in-weblogic-has-a-conflicting-antlr-version-what-to-do/189/5
Thanks,
Sanne
On 6 February 2018 at 13:46, Vlad Mihalcea wrote:
> Thaks
On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 9:43 AM Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> On 6 February 2018 at 15:34, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> > We tend to do this argument where it "not what we would do". Well not
> > everyone is us :)
>
> Not understanding what you mean with that. I'm well aware others might
> have other opin
On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 9:58 AM Gunnar Morling wrote:
> My question essentially is why is it alright to piggy-back the enablement
> of the DDL constraint export on JPA's validation mode option (which only
> has been designed with the lifecycle validation in mind) for AUTO but not
> for CALLBACK?
>
> All of those are valid options. But I think Gunnar's suggestion misses
#3, although I certainly maybe just missed that in his email. Gunnar?
You'd have this:
- No validation: validation mode = NONE, hibernate.validator.apply_to_ddl =
false
- In-memory validation: validation mode = AUTO|CALLBA
*Please do not push anything to 5.2 branch.Thanks,Andrea*
___
hibernate-dev mailing list
hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
I personally think 2 settings to control 1 thing is fugly, but if there is
a consensus that is fine. Bu so far its just been you saying that.
On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 10:09 AM Gunnar Morling wrote:
> > All of those are valid options. But I think Gunnar's suggestion misses
> #3, although I certai
It's not quite clear to me what your preferred alternative is. Not being
able to export constraints to DDL when using the safest validation mode
(CALLBACK) is not desirable IMHO.
+1 to hear what others think.
2018-02-06 17:20 GMT+01:00 Steve Ebersole :
> I personally think 2 settings to control
Well like I said, I understand your not liking that we reuse a JPA-specific
setting regarding the validation mode (single-valued) and expand it to
accept multiple values. I just think its just as bad to use 2 different
settings. 2 wrongs don't make a right.
When you say "safest" you mean (I assu
Hi,
On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 5:01 PM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
>
> Is it valid for a user to want *just* DDL-based validation? How would that
> work in Gunnar's request?
>
>From your writings, I suspect I'm the only one with this opinion but my
answer would be: "not if you use Bean Validation annota
23 matches
Mail list logo
