| Re: [eclipselink-users] Temporal annotation acts differently than mapping? |
The issue seems to be that you have mapped the same column twice, once as a DATE and once as a TIMESTAMP. Not sure if you intended to do this or not. Either remove the duplicate mapping, mark the other also as TIMESTAMP, or define the dateVal2 first. <basic name="dateVal"> <temporal>DATE</temporal> </basic> <basic name="timestampVal"> <temporal>TIMESTAMP</temporal> </basic> <basic name="dateVal2"> <column insertable="false" updatable="false" name="DATEVAL"/> <temporal>TIMESTAMP</temporal> </basic> fcalfo wrote: > > > I added this persistence property and had no errors reported but I'm still > not getting time populated > in the object returned by EclipseLink. > > Since there are no annotations at all on the test class, I believe only > the mapping from orm.xml > could be used by EclipseLink > > ----- http://wiki.eclipse.org/User:James.sutherland.oracle.com James Sutherland http://www.eclipse.org/eclipselink/ EclipseLink , http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/ias/toplink/ TopLink Wiki: http://wiki.eclipse.org/EclipseLink EclipseLink , http://wiki.oracle.com/page/TopLink TopLink Forums: http://forums.oracle.com/forums/forum.jspa?forumID=48 TopLink , http://www.nabble.com/EclipseLink-f26430.html EclipseLink Book: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Java_Persistence Java Persistence -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Temporal-annotation-acts-differently-than-mapping--tp23489987p23636351.html Sent from the EclipseLink - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.