Yes sahoo. We have changed the ArchiveFactoryImpl from glassfish
sources and integrated our merging mechanism. It is working great.
I will raise an issue for this feature and let you know.
Thanks!
On 1/22/07, Sanjeeb Kumar Sahoo <Sanjeeb.Sahoo_at_sun.com> wrote:
> Hi Shaane,
>
> Have you actually experimented with the changes? Do you want to file a
> feature request in GlassFish issue tracker?
>
> Thanks,
> Sahoo
> Sha-né wrote:
> > Hello Sanjeeb,
> >
> > You are right.
> > 1. I was talking about
> > entity-persistence/src/java/oracle/toplink/essentials/ejb/cmp3/persistence/ArchiveFactoryImpl.java.
> >
> > 2. Yes, we do not need to replace the archive factory for new URLs/URL
> > types (we could use jar-file elements or URLStreamHandlerFactory for
> > that).
> >
> > We are working on a portal application that ships with some common
> > entities. The users can write custom extensions to the portal and
> > deploy them independently. These custom extensions can have entities
> > that have relationships with our base entities (as you can imagine
> > with some restrictions). For such relationships to work, the extension
> > entities have to be in the same persistence unit as the base entities.
> > Seaching the archives, we found that merging of persistence units is
> > not supported
> > (https://glassfish.dev.java.net/servlets/BrowseList?list=persistence&by=thread&from=623961).
> >
> >
> > The recommended solution was to merge it during build time. However,
> > in our case, asking customers to modify the persistence.xml for our
> > archive (to add their entities) seems like a pain. If we could replace
> > the ArchiveFactory, the call to load the persistence.xml stream would
> > be handled by us. We could then create an aggregate persistence.xml
> > for the portal persistence unit and return that.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Shaane
> >
> > On 1/22/07, Sanjeeb Kumar Sahoo <Sanjeeb.Sahoo_at_sun.com> wrote:
> >> Hi Shaane,
> >>
> >> I guess you are referring to
> >> entity-persistence/src/java/oracle/toplink/essentials/ejb/cmp3/persistence/ArchiveFactoryImpl.java.
> >>
> >> You have made a good point. The current implementation can be changed
> >> very easily to make use of Services API. I never anticipated a
> >> requirement for user to extend the implementation for new URL or Archive
> >> types. May I know what kind of URL or Archive structure do you wish to
> >> handle that the current implementation does not handle?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Sahoo
> >>
> >> Sha-né wrote:
> >> > Hello all,
> >> >
> >> > Would it be possible to make the ArchiveFactoryImpl pluggable? We
> >> > could use the Service Provider mechanism
> >> >
> >> (http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.3/docs/guide/jar/jar.html#Service%20Provider)
> >>
> >> > to plugin a new type of ArchiveFactory. This would allow us to plugin
> >> > new types of Archive impls customized to our project source structure.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks
> >> > Shaane
> >>
>