DATAJDBC-131 - Basic support for Maps #17
Conversation
| @@ -193,14 +193,18 @@ public long count(Class<?> domainType) { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| @Override | |||
| public <T> Iterable<T> findAllByProperty(Object rootId, JdbcPersistentProperty property) { | |||
| public Iterable findAllByProperty(Object rootId, JdbcPersistentProperty property) { | |||
|
|
|||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not a fan of dropping the generic signatures. I sense we need to dig a little deeper to solve this one. Otherwise, things should be wrapped with the proper suppression annotations.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah, I was half-hearted fiddling around with the generics. I put them back in, along with @SuppressWarnings. I already created a separate issue for cleaning this up all over the code base. I was somewhat inconsistent in the past about this.
| @@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ public void delete(Object rootId, PropertyPath propertyPath) { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| @Override | |||
| public <T> void deleteAll(PropertyPath propertyPath) { | |||
| public void deleteAll(PropertyPath propertyPath) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This alters the signature from the interface, generating warnings.
|
Regarding the "isMap" issue. I for now extracted it in a separate method because eventually, it won't be just for I agree there, there might be a missing structure hiding in there somewhere but currently, I'm not able to identify it. |
Aggregate roots with properties of type java.util.Map get properly inserted, updated and deleted.
Known limitations:
- Naming strategy does not allow for multiple references via Set, Map or directly to the same entity.
- The table for the referenced Entity contains the column for the map key.
A workaround for that would be to manipulate the DbActions in the AggregateChange yourself.
Put generics back in and added @SupressWarnings where this caused warnings. Extracted the test “isMap” into a “isQualified” method on the property.
gregturn
force-pushed
the
issue/DATAJDBC-131
branch
from
2d1f511 to
1579a3c
Compare
|
Resolved via 1291b5d. |
We now provide an annotation-based activation model for R2DBC repositories. Configuration classes can be annotated with @EnableR2dbcRepositories and configuration infrastructure will scan for bean definitions to implement declared R2DBC repositories. Original pull request: #17.
We now provide an abstract R2DBC configuration that registers beans required for R2DBC's DatabaseClient. Original pull request: #17.
Add missing header & package-info. Update nullability and add tests. Original pull request: #17.
Aggregate roots with properties of type java.util.Map get properly inserted, updated and deleted.
Known limitations:
A workaround for that would be to manipulate the DbActions in the AggregateChange yourself.