|
|
|
 |
|
Sort Order:
I have attached the testCase.
Sorry. Thanks for the testcase, but you really need to read http://www.jpox.org/docs/bug_reporting.html since we won't be touching what you provided
Corrected testCase to match test case definition/
Well,
I have corrected my testcase to match the specification. Be patient during the population of DB (about 1mn). Thx for the updated "testcase". I took a look but just don't have the time to load up someone's application (in this case 37 classes). Using someone's testcase means having to understand their data. Suggest that you define something smaller and more meaningful or it just won't be looked at (or as the Problem Reporting guide puts it "Your test case should have at most 4 or 5 classes"). You say it is "too slow" but you don't define what precise thing is "too slow". Is it retrieval of a collection doing too many SQLs? or something else.
Ok...
Thank you for the time you spend. I start this report because erik suggest me to do that. I know that "the Problem Reporting guide" says no more than 4 or 5 classes. I have remove some other classes (I really can't do less now :-) ) and I have renamed some classes to be more comprehensive (I hope), but the schema is still enormous, I know that. This is perhaps why the makePersistent is slow. I explain what "slow" mean for me: My Order class is holding a collection of OrderComposition (with a big schema). When the collection contain 400 objects, it take about 10s to be persisted after a "detach". |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Improvement
Closed
Minor
Slow makePersistent
No wonder it runs slow, I can't even find it!