Yes, that was pretty much it. If all relationship attribute
retrieval was free then they might all have defaulted to being
eager, but it was just about drawing a line where the cost-benefit
made sense. We considered having a global option that would allow
setting/overriding the default for all attributes of a given type
but never got around to spec'ing that out.
-Mike
On 29/12/2014 12:34 PM, Hebert Coelho
wrote:
Hello Yannick,
My guess is that to bring a *One relationship from the database
is because it is a "cheap" behavior. Usually it will not
overhead the processor or the network.
But this is my guess, I believe that some of the JPA creators
could answer that better.
Regards
On 12/29/2014 03:18 PM, Yannick Majoros wrote:
Hello Hebert,
Thanks for your answer. The discussion I've been
involved in our why this is the default, as stated by the
spec. Is this just for historical reasons. And if it isn't,
what is the reasoning behind that?
Thanks,
Yannick
Le lun. 29 déc. 2014 14:17, Hebert
Coelho < hebolive@xxxxxxxxx>
a écrit :
Hello Yannick,
Because it is written in the spec. (:
Take a look at the spec in the section 11.1 that details
the annotations and its defaults.
On 12/28/2014 06:54 PM, Yannick Majoros wrote:
_______________________________________________
eclipselink-users mailing list
eclipselink-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-users
_______________________________________________
eclipselink-users mailing list
eclipselink-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-users
_______________________________________________
eclipselink-users mailing list
eclipselink-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-users
|
