From: Wonseok Kim <guruwons_at_gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 00:41:28 +0900

I found another bug in JUnitTestCase, please see below diff.
I added following modification to the attached file.

Thanks,
- Wonseok

Index:
src/java/oracle/toplink/essentials/testing/framework/junit/JUnitTestCase.java
===================================================================
RCS file:
/cvs/glassfish/entity-persistence-tests/src/java/oracle/toplink/essentials/testing/framework/junit/JUnitTestCase.java,v
retrieving revision 1.20
diff -c -r1.20 JUnitTestCase.java
***
src/java/oracle/toplink/essentials/testing/framework/junit/JUnitTestCase.java
19 Oct 2006 19:52:27 -0000 1.20

---
src/java/oracle/toplink/essentials/testing/framework/junit/JUnitTestCase.java
26 Oct 2006 15:23:09 -0000
***************
*** 144,150 ****
      }
      public static EntityManagerFactory getEntityManagerFactory(String
persistenceUnitName, Map properties){
!         EntityManagerFactory emfNamedPersistenceUnit =
(EntityManagerFactory)emfNamedPersistenceUnits.get("persistenceUnitName");
          if (emfNamedPersistenceUnit == null){
              emfNamedPersistenceUnit =
Persistence.createEntityManagerFactory(persistenceUnitName, properties);
              emfNamedPersistenceUnits.put(persistenceUnitName,
emfNamedPersistenceUnit);
--- 144,150 ----
      }
      public static EntityManagerFactory getEntityManagerFactory(String
persistenceUnitName, Map properties){
!         EntityManagerFactory emfNamedPersistenceUnit =
(EntityManagerFactory)emfNamedPersistenceUnits.get(persistenceUnitName);
          if (emfNamedPersistenceUnit == null){
              emfNamedPersistenceUnit =
Persistence.createEntityManagerFactory(persistenceUnitName, properties);
              emfNamedPersistenceUnits.put(persistenceUnitName,
emfNamedPersistenceUnit);
***************
*** 173,184 ****
      }
      public static void
closeEntityManagerFactoryNamedPersistenceUnit(String persistenceUnitName) {
!         EntityManagerFactory emfNamedPersistenceUnit =
(EntityManagerFactory)emfNamedPersistenceUnits.get("persistenceUnitName");
          if(emfNamedPersistenceUnit != null) {
              if(emfNamedPersistenceUnit.isOpen()) {
                  emfNamedPersistenceUnit.close();
              }
!             emfNamedPersistenceUnit = null;
          }
      }
--- 173,184 ----
      }
      public static void
closeEntityManagerFactoryNamedPersistenceUnit(String persistenceUnitName) {
!         EntityManagerFactory emfNamedPersistenceUnit =
(EntityManagerFactory)emfNamedPersistenceUnits.get(persistenceUnitName);
          if(emfNamedPersistenceUnit != null) {
              if(emfNamedPersistenceUnit.isOpen()) {
                  emfNamedPersistenceUnit.close();
              }
!             emfNamedPersistenceUnits.remove(persistenceUnitName);
          }
      }
On 10/26/06, Wonseok Kim <guruwons_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Tom, Marina
> I filed an issue for this.
> https://glassfish.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1380
>
> In addition to Tom's modification, I changed some other files regarding to
> the problems shown in my first email.
> * modified nullable column attributes of Buyer to follow the specified
> unique constraints.
> * modified some tests of EntityManagerJUnitTestSuite to show occurred
> exceptions if test failed.
> * added ddl file names to the persistence.xml of ddl-generation-testmodel
> - because default ddl files are overwritten by another pu's ddl generation.
>
> I confirmed that tests are running well on clean database.
> Marina, could you check in this(attached) if there is no problem. I don't
> have check-in permission -.-;
>
> Thanks
> - Wonseok
>
> On 10/26/06, Tom Ware <tom.ware_at_oracle.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Wonsoek,
> >
> >   I fixed the problem by fixing two config files for the tests.  I
> > tested with clean databases on both Derby and Oracle and on an already
> > populated Oracle database.
> >
> > 1. I have removed DDL Generation from the base persistence unit.  We
> > initially added it to try to solve some issues we were having with
> > constraints.  I think removing it should be fine since the DDL
> > Generation is tested in a specific model and all the other models are
> > covered by TopLink table generation.
> >
> > 2. I have made a change to one xml file to workaround newly added issue
> > 1376.
> >
> >   I would like to check these files in, but will need to enter some
> > appropriate enhancement requests prior to removing DDL generation from
> > the base persistence unit.  I probably will not get a chance to do that
> > until Monday.  Feel free to check them in if it makes things easier for
> > you.
> >
> >   The changes are attached.
> >
> > -Tom
> >
> >
>
>