doctrine/archived-orm
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/doctrine/orm.git synced 2026-03-23 22:42:18 +01:00
Code Issues 5.3k Packages Projects Releases 100 Wiki Activity

DDC-547: Consider allowing custom PersistentCollection implementations #674

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-01-22 12:46:23 +01:00 by admin · 10 comments
admin commented 2026-01-22 12:46:23 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @doctrinebot on GitHub (Apr 27, 2010).

Originally assigned to: @Ocramius on GitHub.

Jira issue originally created by user romanb:

We should consider allowing the configuration of custom PersistentCollection implementations on a per-association basis.
This could allow users to craft optimized (SQL) behavior for for some of their collections to improve performance without changing the domain model code.

For this, PersistentCollection needs to be designed for inheritance.

Originally created by @doctrinebot on GitHub (Apr 27, 2010). Originally assigned to: @Ocramius on GitHub. Jira issue originally created by user romanb: We should consider allowing the configuration of custom PersistentCollection implementations on a per-association basis. This could allow users to craft optimized (SQL) behavior for for some of their collections to improve performance without changing the domain model code. For this, PersistentCollection needs to be designed for inheritance.
admin added the New FeatureCan't Fix labels 2026-01-22 12:46:23 +01:00
admin closed this issue 2026-01-22 12:46:23 +01:00
admin commented 2026-01-22 12:46:24 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@doctrinebot commented on GitHub (Aug 26, 2010):

Comment created by romanb:

Rescheduled for 2.1. Might be 2.x.

@doctrinebot commented on GitHub (Aug 26, 2010): Comment created by romanb: Rescheduled for 2.1. Might be 2.x.
admin commented 2026-01-22 12:46:25 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@doctrinebot commented on GitHub (Dec 24, 2010):

Comment created by @beberlei:

Reschedule for 2.x

@doctrinebot commented on GitHub (Dec 24, 2010): Comment created by @beberlei: Reschedule for 2.x
admin commented 2026-01-22 12:46:26 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@doctrinebot commented on GitHub (May 20, 2014):

Comment created by Wilt:

Any progress on this new feature?

@doctrinebot commented on GitHub (May 20, 2014): Comment created by Wilt: Any progress on this new feature?
admin commented 2026-01-22 12:46:26 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@doctrinebot commented on GitHub (May 20, 2014):

Comment created by @ocramius:

This can't be solved in the 2.x series because of the tight coupling between association UnitOfWork logic and the PersistentCollection API.

@doctrinebot commented on GitHub (May 20, 2014): Comment created by @ocramius: This can't be solved in the `2.x` series because of the tight coupling between association `UnitOfWork` logic and the `PersistentCollection` API.
admin commented 2026-01-22 12:46:28 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Arkemlar commented on GitHub (Mar 5, 2017):

@ocramius can you give recommendation about how to make workaround of this limitation? Custom collections is really needed in domain logic.

@Arkemlar commented on GitHub (Mar 5, 2017): @ocramius can you give recommendation about how to make workaround of this limitation? Custom collections is really needed in domain logic.
admin commented 2026-01-22 12:46:28 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Ocramius commented on GitHub (Mar 6, 2017):

There is no possible workaround right now.

On 5 Mar 2017 3:57 p.m., "Yanosh" notifications@github.com wrote:

@ocramius https://github.com/ocramius can you give recommendation about
how to make workaround of this limitation? Custom collections is really
needed in domain logic.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/doctrine/doctrine2/issues/5057#issuecomment-284233242,
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJakJyx3QXHo3V8P9x-iKE7sRWFnWUGks5ris1MgaJpZM4MTb52
.

@Ocramius commented on GitHub (Mar 6, 2017): There is no possible workaround right now. On 5 Mar 2017 3:57 p.m., "Yanosh" <notifications@github.com> wrote: > @ocramius <https://github.com/ocramius> can you give recommendation about > how to make workaround of this limitation? Custom collections is really > needed in domain logic. > > — > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <https://github.com/doctrine/doctrine2/issues/5057#issuecomment-284233242>, > or mute the thread > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJakJyx3QXHo3V8P9x-iKE7sRWFnWUGks5ris1MgaJpZM4MTb52> > . >
admin commented 2026-01-22 12:46:29 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Itach1Uchixa commented on GitHub (Jul 6, 2018):

Little workaround @Arkemlar : https://gist.github.com/Itach1Uchixa/83fedd850e4705b0b51589afaefdfdf1

@Itach1Uchixa commented on GitHub (Jul 6, 2018): Little workaround @Arkemlar : https://gist.github.com/Itach1Uchixa/83fedd850e4705b0b51589afaefdfdf1
admin commented 2026-01-22 12:46:30 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@hugochinchilla commented on GitHub (Nov 5, 2019):

Any progress on this?

@hugochinchilla commented on GitHub (Nov 5, 2019): Any progress on this?
admin commented 2026-01-22 12:46:30 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Ocramius commented on GitHub (Nov 5, 2019):

@hugochinchilla no, this is likely not going to be solved for 3.x either due to its complexity

@Ocramius commented on GitHub (Nov 5, 2019): @hugochinchilla no, this is likely not going to be solved for 3.x either due to its complexity
admin commented 2026-01-22 12:46:31 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Ocramius commented on GitHub (Nov 5, 2019):

Gonna close here as "won't fix".

While the feature is a "most wanted", having a placeholder isn't useful until someone comes up with an implementation plan that is viable and that can be attempted.

Please open a new issue if you have an approach that you think could work (considering lazy-loading and UnitOfWork semantics).

@Ocramius commented on GitHub (Nov 5, 2019): Gonna close here as "won't fix". While the feature is a "most wanted", having a placeholder isn't useful until someone comes up with an implementation plan that is viable and that can be attempted. Please open a new issue if you have an approach that you think could work (considering lazy-loading and `UnitOfWork` semantics).
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
BC Break
Bug
Can't Fix
Deprecation
Documentation
DQL
Duplicate
Failing Test
Hacktoberfest
Improvement
Improvement
Incomplete
Invalid
Missing Tests
New Feature
PR Created
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 Question
Regression
Status: Waiting feedback
Waiting feedback
WIP
Won't Fix
No Label Can't Fix New Feature
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
admin
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: doctrine/archived-orm#674
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?