Re: [hibernate-dev] Legacy positional params and JPA "positional" params
I ended up changing the default to 1 for consistency, but adding a setting
`hibernate.query.sql.jdbc_style_params_base` upgrading users can use
temporarily.
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 4:01 AM andrea boriero <andrea(a)hibernate.org> wrote:
I would prefer consistency, but as you pointed out this for users
will be
another upgrade concer , so may be for a 5.3 it is better to mantain the
zero-based style.
On 18 November 2017 at 19:18, Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org> wrote:
> Another thing that comes up is parameters and native queries. In native
> queries, all 3 forms are valid: named, jpa-ordinal and jdbc-style.
>
> Again historically all positional (jdbc-style) parameters are zero-based.
> This open up the problem of different bases depending on whether jpa-style
> or jdbc-style is used. E.g.
>
> session.createNativeQuery( "... where a.name = ?" ).setParameter( 0,
> "Steve" );
> session.createNativeQuery( "... where a.name = ?1" ).setParameter( 1,
> "Steve" );
>
> To me its a bit odd to have these different bases. I understand that
> because they are different "parameter strategies" it is easy enough to
> explain to a user the difference. But I wonder if that is something we
> should make consistent to just always assume an ordinal base of 1, i.e.:
>
> session.createNativeQuery( "... where a.name = ?" ).setParameter( 1,
> "Steve" );
> session.createNativeQuery( "... where a.name = ?1" ).setParameter( 1,
> "Steve" );
>
> The only down side to this is yet another upgrade concern for users.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 12:15 PM Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 I see no problem either.
> >
> >
> > On 17 November 2017 at 15:57, Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org>
> wrote:
> > > Actually its possible that the TCK always tested it and merging
> > > `javax.persistence.Query` and `org.hibernate.query.Query` may be the
> > > culprit. But either way, the net result is the same...
> > >
> > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 8:44 AM Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I wont bore everyone with the history here, but long story short is
> that
> > >> we need to start treating JPA "positional" parameters as
positional
> in
> > the
> > >> `javax.persistence.Parameter#getPosition` sense. Even though there
> is
> > >> nothing positional about JPA's positional parameters, this has
moved
> > from a
> > >> philosophical discussion to a practical one as the JPA 2.2 TCK is
> > testing
> > >> this, whereas older ones did not
> > >>
> > >> To do that however, we need to drop our older positional parameter
> > >> support. That feature has been deprecated for quite some time now.
> > Unless
> > >> there are objections, I will plan on dropping that in 5.3
> > >>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > hibernate-dev mailing list
> > > hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > > 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
>