Hi Michael,
Isn't the spec requirement wrong? While it might be
tricky to update version column of all tables, if
bulk update doesn't do it, any parallel tx can override the changes.
thanks,
-marina
----- Original Message -----
From: mb124283_at_dev.java.net
Date: Friday, January 13, 2006 11:11 am
Subject: [Issue 154] New - EJBQL: bulk UPDATE statement should not update version columns
> https://glassfish.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=154
> Issue #|154
> Summary|EJBQL: bulk UPDATE statement should not
> update version
> | columns
> Component|glassfish
> Version|9.0pe
> Platform|All
> OS/Version|All
> URL|
> Status|NEW
> Status whiteboard|
> Keywords|
> Resolution|
> Issue type|TASK
> Priority|P3
> Subcomponent|entity-persistence
> Assigned to|tware
> Reported by|mb124283
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------- Additional comments from mb124283_at_dev.java.net Fri Jan 13
> 19:11:47 +0000 2006 -------
> The PFD version of the EJB3 persistence spec clarifies that an
> EJBQL bulk UPDATE
> statement does not update version columns.
>
> Today the EJBQL query
> UPDATE Customer c SET c.name = 'CHANGED'
> is mapped to the following SQL:
> UPDATE CMP3_CUSTOMER
> SET NAME = 'CHANGED', CUST_VERSION = (CUST_VERSION + 1)
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>
>