It is a valid assumption (secondary using smaller pool). If you do all of your schema generation up front you won't need any secondary connections for those ops also. If your chosen value generation

I'm aware this is kind of a generic question, but is there any guidance or any best practices around connection factory configuration when using connection pooling? We use DN RDBMS with HikariCP, and

Not got the time to look through that at the moment. Suggest that you look in our test cases, since there's a lot of example of subqueries with

I'd like to implement a JDOQL query for the following SQL statement: select * from project p, project_strategic_bucket psb where psb.project_id_oid = p.id and psb.strategic_bucket_id_oid in

The docs https://www.datanucleus.org/products/accessplatform_6_0/jdo/query.html#cache_results describes how you can gain access to internal objects and hence evict particular things should you need to

Hi! I hope you can help with this issue. I have a simple inheritance of these two classes. I've got them mapped like this with subclass-table inheritence strategy. Also I have query results cache

IgnoreCache is for the L1 cache, as per the JDO spec. You simply don't use result caching on that query, i.e either don't enable it in the first place or set datanucleus.query.resultCacheType to none.

Is there a method I can call, when executing the count query, to avoid getting the result from cache??? I've tried with the method setIgnoreCache. But it still getting the same error. If you can help

As replied on Gitter,Result Caching is for candidate results and nothing else currently, as shown by the implementation. A "count" query is not for candidate results

I've got a project with datanucleus v6.0.0-release and in my properties file I've got configured with the following values: As you can see I have the datanucleus.query.results.cached enabled In my

That was enlightening: I hadn't appreciated the two levels of types: JDBC types and MySQL types and that the mappings between them are not a simple one-to-one. Given that the type names are identical

If you look at what the MySQL JDBC driver provides to DataNucleus, you see that it supports DATETIME and TIMESTAMP as the SQL TYPE when the JDBC TYPE is

I tried adding an explicit JDBC type via: <field name="created"> <column jdbc-type="TIMESTAMP" /> </field> but DN still creates a DATETIME column instead of a TIMESTAMP

Traditionally we have used the java.util.Date class for storing time instants in UTC time - in all existing tables DN has created a 'TIMESTAMP' type field in MySQL - which works fine. Recently we

Thanks Andy, that worked well. I used it within my setOrdering call: setOrdering("score ascending, JDOHelper.getObjectId(this) ascending);

JDO has

If a class does not have an attribute defined to be the primary key field but, rather, relies on DN creating the primary key column in the RBDMS table implicitly, is there any way to specify the

Yes, JDO, JPA (and Jakarta Persistence) all allow 1 discriminator (value) only. JDO metadata strictly speaking permits multiple columns for some reason, but there is only space for 1 value and that's

We have a table like: node(nodetype, subnodetype, ...) From this one table we want to have several persistent java classes. Both node.nodetype and node.subnodetype is needed to discriminate the java

I am trying to build a test case for JDO. When I clone https://github.com/datanucleus/test-jdo then mvn clean compile test I get a failure, also created