12:36 p.m.
Well again we were just talking about HHH-10707 and you asked "will it be
integrated upstream"...
I can tell by your reaction that you really were asking whether *your*
change would be integrated upstream, but that was not obviously from your
email :)
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 12:32 PM Christian Beikov <
christian.beikov(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Is the fix I proposed in my PR(
https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-orm/pull/1561) non-compatible?
Did I miss discussion about that somewhere or didn't you have time to
review that yet?
Am 23.09.2016 um 18:50 schrieb Steve Ebersole:
Depends on the "fix" we all agree on. Mainly whether that leads to any
non-compatible SPI changes.
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 11:41 AM Christian Beikov <
christian.beikov(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Ahh okay, I see. Sorry, I didn't fully read my previous mail and forgot I
> asked that question ^^
> Well then I'll try upgrading to 5.2 and hope for the best :)
>
> So are you considering merging that to 5.2 then?
>
>
>
> Am 23.09.2016 um 18:36 schrieb Steve Ebersole:
>
> Nope. You asked:
>
> Are the problems with Hibernate 5.1+ and Infinispan fixed yet? I didn't
> consider upgrading yet because I read of some issues.
>
> Now its possibly I misread your reference to HIbernate+Infinispan
> problems to mean the only ones I know of. hence the HHH-10707 reference.
> If you meant some other "Hibernate 5.1+ and Infinispan" problem, then I
> guess you could have been more specific ;)
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 11:33 AM Christian Beikov <
> christian.beikov(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Wrong thread?
>>
>>
>> Am 23.09.2016 um 17:53 schrieb Steve Ebersole:
>>
>> There are some conceptual mismatch problem that IMO stem from the L2C
>> SPI. We are discussing that all as part of
>> https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/HHH-10707
>>
>> Whether that affects you really depends how you configure caching. If
>> you try to reuse regions for different types of data (entity, collection,
>> etc) then it will affect you. If you define different access strategies
>> for the same region then it will affect you.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 1:02 AM Christian Beikov <
>> christian.beikov(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Well to be fair, I already reported that this "regression" was
>>> introduced in 4.2.8 by placing the ON predicate on the target table join
>>> instead of the collection table join as was done before in 4.2.7.SP1.
>>> I am not using 4.x anymore but since Wildfly ships with Hibernate 5.0, I
>>> suppose that others could benefit from this too.
>>> Are the problems with Hibernate 5.1+ and Infinispan fixed yet? I didn't
>>> consider upgrading yet because I read of some issues.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Christian
>>>
>>> Am 22.09.2016 um 22:10 schrieb Gail Badner:
>>> > Hi Christian,
>>> >
>>> > We are only backporting critical issues and regressions to 5.0 at this
>>> > point, so it can't be backported to 5.0. If no regressions caused
by
>>> > this fix are reported in 5.2, I would consider backporting to 5.1.
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> > Gail
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:14 AM, Christian Beikov
>>> > <christian.beikov(a)gmail.com
<mailto:christian.beikov@gmail.com>>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Thanks, I know that it's a beauty ^^
>>> > Hope this can get into all 5.x branches?
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> > Christian
>>> > Am 20.09.2016 um 23:05 schrieb Steve Ebersole:
>>> > > I took a quick look. I'd prefer to see better solution as
we
>>> > migrate
>>> > > to SQM; but for 5.x, given how Hibernate generates SQL there,
I
>>> > am not
>>> > > sure how else you would possibly do this
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 12:54 PM Vlad Mihalcea
>>> > > <mihalcea.vlad(a)gmail.com
<mailto:mihalcea.vlad@gmail.com>
>>> > <mailto:mihalcea.vlad@gmail.com
<mailto:mihalcea.vlad@gmail.com
>>> >>>
>>> > wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks,
>>> > >
>>> > > I'm going to review it tomorrow.
>>> > >
>>> > > Vlad
>>> > >
>>> > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 8:38 PM, Christian Beikov <
>>> > >christian.beikov(a)gmail.com
<mailto:christian.beikov@gmail.com>
>>> > <mailto:christian.beikov@gmail.com
>>> > <mailto:christian.beikov@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > Hey again,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > I implemented the approach that I proposed in the
issue
>>> and a
>>> > > test in
>>> > > > https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-orm/pull/1561
>>> > <https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-orm/pull/1561>
>>> > > >
>>> > > > It detects left joins with join tables that use the
target
>>> > table
>>> > > alias.
>>> > > > The join table is replaced with a subquery and the
WITH
>>> clause
>>> > > is moved
>>> > > > to the join of the subquery.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Any comments?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Regards,
>>> > > > Christian
>>> > > > _______________________________________________
>>> > > > hibernate-dev mailing list
>>> > > > hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> > <mailto:hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>>> > <mailto:hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
>>> > <mailto:hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
>>> > > >https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>>> > <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev>
>>> > > >
>>> > > _______________________________________________
>>> > > hibernate-dev mailing list
>>> > > hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> > <mailto:hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>>> > <mailto:hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
>>> > <mailto:hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
>>> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>>> > <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev>
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > hibernate-dev mailing list
>>> > hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:
>>> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
>>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>>> > <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev>
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> hibernate-dev mailing list
>>> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>