[ http://opensource.atlassian.com/projects/hibernate/browse/HHH-1501?page=c... ] Steve Ebersole commented on HHH-1501: ------------------------------------- Sergey, attitude like that is not going to get you help. Guys, so look at it like this. Lets take the String case (the byte[] is really the same). So you tell Hibernate to map this property as a String. In the absence of you telling it anything else it needs to determine the proper database type (well techincally the JDBC type). What you both are asking is that it do some form of database look up to make this determination (you may not now it, but that is in fact what you are asking). That is not reasonable, imho, when Hibernate already provides means for y'all to tell it the type (Hibernate type which binds the java and sql type) to use for that property. If thats *really* what you want I'll be happy to add an interface that Hibernate can ask for the Hibernate type it should use for a given property when that property defines no type. Y'all can then do this look up in a custom impl of that interface. Why do I say that that is what you are asking for? Well how else are you expecting it to know what JDBC type to correlate to that java type for that given property? Surely you are not suggesting that we assume the widest possible JDBC data type (aka map all strings to CLOB by default). That would be insane. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://opensource.atlassian.com/projects/hibernate/secure/Administrators.... - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira