Skip to main content

Notice: this Wiki will be going read only early in 2024 and edits will no longer be possible. Please see: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/wikis/Wiki-shutdown-plan for the plan.

Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "Talk:EclipseLink/DesignDocs/214519"

(ELTable: new section)
(ELTable)
Line 4: Line 4:
 
----
 
----
  
== ELTable ==
+
== @ELTable? ==
  
 
--[[User:Douglas.clarke.oracle.com|Doug]] 13:58, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 
--[[User:Douglas.clarke.oracle.com|Doug]] 13:58, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:59, 5 October 2010

Everything in @ELTable should be optional and the contents should override that of @Table.
What about a calling the annotation @TableExt (Ext for extension) or @TableOverrides or something else?
Gordon Yorke 13:58, 1 October 2010 (UTC)


@ELTable?

--Doug 13:58, 5 October 2010 (UTC) My first impression is that I am not fond of duplicating standard JPA annotations with EL prefix if it can be avoided.

  • Is this really a table scoped feature or is it a PU level config that should be applied to all tables (Note: Have not read the original request).
  • PU Config
    • PU Property
    • Even if it is a table level config it would be nice to configure it once for all tables using a PU property
  • eclipselink-orm.xml would allow an additional optional attribute in <table .../>
  • Annotation
    • If it is required at a per table level should we consider only supporting this using an eclipselink-orm.xml?
    • If we believe an annotation is essential is there a better pattern to extend @Table without duplicating it?

Back to the top