| Craig Russell (JIRA) 2006-08-10, 7:11 pm |
| [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/brows...action_12427369 ]
Craig Russell commented on JDO-405:
-----------------------------------
> Only one value is needed for representing "no limit" and this was -1 with "fetch-depth" (before the renaming) and is what 12.7.4 has (and would be consistent with what values maxFetchDepth takes).
I agree with Andy. Without looking at the document's history, it is inconsistent, and should be -1 to indicate no limit.
> I would add that page 129 has an example that uses "fetch-depth" which was removed/renamed, so this needs fixing.
This has already been filed as a Change Log. See http://wiki.apache.org/jdo/ChangeLog
> recursion-depth - fetching the whole graph with 0 or -1?
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JDO-405
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-405
> Project: JDO
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: JDO 2 final
> Reporter: Ilan Kirsh
> Fix For: JDO 2 maintenance release 1
>
>
> In page 124: "A value of -1 means that the recursion-depth is not limited by traversing this field."
> In page 127: "A recursion-depth of 0 will fetch the whole graph of instances reachable from this field"
> Is there a difference between these two?
> In addition, I think that -1 / 0 as a default might be better than 1 it terms of performance, because tracking such cycles has some overhead, which we might not want to pay for most fields in which this feature is not needed (and MaxFetchDepth is suffic
ient).
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secur...nistrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
|