Re: [hibernate-dev] HHH-7018 and one more change to how we serialize EntityManagerFactory instances...
I'll set the EntityManagerFactory name to:
(1) explicit AvailableSettings.SESSION_FACTORY_NAME if specified
(2) use application specified pu-name if pu-name is specified (not
always the case, especially in test environments)
(3) uuid
On 02/08/2012 11:08 AM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
If I understand correctly you are thinking there is a case where the
"PU name" would not be unique for a given app? That is the only time
I can see this being a concern. If it is possible that the same app
can have different PU names on different nodes in the cluster then
simply using PU name as EMF name wont work there. But pretty sure I
said that this will need to allow explicitly setting of the EMF name.
But regardless UUID will never work in a cluster. Thats been covered
a few times here. UUID is merely a fallback which assumes ser and
deser happen in the same VM.
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Scott Marlow<smarlow(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> It wouldn't be difficult to switch back to using UUIDs in the EMF. Neither
> way is perfect (see discussion on HHH-6897).
>
>
>
> On 02/08/2012 08:28 AM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
>>
>> On 02/08/2012 04:23 AM, Christian Bauer wrote:
>>>
>>> (For whatever reason, I still don't understand why EMF clustering would
>>> be different than SF clustering.)
>>
>>
>> This is exactly the point I am missing here as well.
>>
>