On 5/4/17, 10:59 AM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> So long as we are not requiring providers to
> chose TIMESTAMP_WITH_TIMEZONE/TIME_WITH_TIMEZONE as the mapping
> for java.time.OffsetDatetime/java.time.OffsetTime then that text looks
> good to me. Also, why no support for java.time.Zoned* variants?
>
Since this is only an MR, we wanted to provide something
straightforward and simple enough to accommodate in the
time frame that we have -- hence the restrictions to time
types directly supported by JDBC.
>
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:26 PM Lukas Jungmann
> <lukas.jungmann_at_oracle.com <mailto:lukas.jungmann_at_oracle.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> for this, I think adding java.time.LocalDate,
> java.time.LocalTime, java.time.LocalDateTime, java.time.OffsetTime
> and java.time.OffsetDateTime can be acceptable and doable from JPA
> MR perspective so it is on par with others such as JDBC. That means
> following additions (in italics) to the spec, which I'd like to propose:
>
>
> *2.2 Persistent Fields and Properties*
> ...
> The persistent fields or properties of an entity may be of the
> following types: Java primitive types;
> java.lang.String; other Java serializable types (including wrappers
> of the primitive types,
> java.math.BigInteger, java.math.BigDecimal, java.util.Date,
> java.util.Calendar[5], java.sql.Date, java.sql.Time, java.sql.Timestamp,
> byte[], Byte[], char[], Character[], /java.time.LocalDate,
> java.time.LocalTime, java.time.LocalDateTime,
> java.time.OffsetTime, java.time.OffsetDateTime,/ and user-defined
> types that implement the Serializable
> interface); enums; entity types; collections of entity types;
> embeddable classes (see Section
> 2.5); collections of basic and embeddable types (see Section 2.6).
> …
>
>
> *2.8 Mapping Defaults for Non-Relationship Fields or Properties*
>
> …
> If the type of the field or property is one of the following, it is
> mapped in the same way as it
> would if it were annotated as Basic: Java primitive types, wrappers
> of the primitive types,
> java.lang.String, java.math.BigInteger, java.math.BigDecimal,
> java.util.Date, java.util.Calendar, java.sql.Date, java.sql.Time,
> java.sql.Timestamp, /java.time.LocalDate, java.time.LocalTime,
> java.time.LocalDateTime, java.time.OffsetTime,
> java.time.OffsetDateTime,/
> byte[], Byte[], char[], Character[], enums, any other
> type that implements Serializable. See Sections 11.1.6, 11.1.18,
> 11.1.28, and 11.1.51.
> …
>
>
> *11.1.6 Basic Annotation*
>
> The Basic annotation is the simplest type of mapping to a database
> column. The Basic annotation
> can be applied to a persistent property or instance variable of any
> of the following types: Java primitive
> types, wrappers of the primitive types, java.lang.String,
> java.math.BigInteger,
> java.math.BigDecimal, java.util.Date, java.util.Calendar, java.sql.Date,
> java.sql.Time, java.sql.Timestamp, /java.time.LocalDate,
> java.time.LocalTime,//
> //java.time.LocalDateTime, java.time.OffsetTime,
> java.time.OffsetDateTime,/ byte[], Byte[], char[], Character[],
> enums, and any other type that implements Serializable. As described
> in Section 2.8, the use of
> the Basic annotation is optional for persistent fields and
> properties of these types. If the Basic annotation
> is not specified for such a field or property, the default values of
> the Basic annotation will apply.
>
> /Mapping of java.time.LocalDate, java.time.LocalTime,
> java.time.LocalDateTime, java.time.OffsetTime
> and java.time.OffsetDateTime types////to columns other than those
> supported by the mappings defined by//
> //Appendix B of the JDBC 4.2 specification is not required to
> be////supported by the persistence provider
> beyond the support required////for other serializable types./
>
> *
> *
>
> *13. * *Related Documents*
>
> ...
> [ 5 ] /JDBC 4.2 Specification./ http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=221.
> ...
>
> WDYT?
>
> Thank you,
> --lukas
>
>
> On 5/2/17 1:42 PM, Werner Keil wrote:
>> I admit, it probably exceeds a simple MR, but since at least Bean
>> Validation 2 adds java.time support for Java EE 8 I wonder, if
>> https://java.net/jira/browse/JPA_SPEC-63 was addressable or not
>> for EE 8?
>>
>> I am also aware of the gross incompatibility of e.g. java.sql.Time
>> etc. and the types in java.time all of which are final, so it does
>> not look like the underlying JDBC in 4.2 or beyond is able to
>> support all of it, but could e.g. TemporalType get further
>> variations including "LOCAL_DATE_TIME", "INSTANT" or whatever
>> seems appropriate?
>>
>> Werner
>