No performance implications that I know of. It's the same code, just a question of where it lives. And yes, it is very easy, which is why Rails (and Grails) adopted it.
After you get your app built, try adding some audit logging to persistence operations. With persistence mixed into your entities, you'd hosed. So like scaffolding, it's excellent for getting up and running quick, but not necessarily a viable long term solution. cheers, barneyb On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Dan Vega <[email protected]> wrote: > Are there any performance concerns with the active record approach? It just > all seems very easy to me which is why I like it. > > 1.) model your domain > 2.) create your controller > 3.) mixin any services needed > 4.) view talks to controller > 5.) data is persisted auto majically :) > > Thank You > Dan Vega > [email protected] > http://www.danvega.org > > > On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 2:44 PM, Barney Boisvert <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Yeah, in general. Among other benefits, it lets your domain entities >> not be coupled to any Grails classes. And if you want to go for >> broke, they don't need to be coupled to Hibernate either. Or even JPA >> if you're a glutton for pain. >> >> cheers, >> barneyb >> >> On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Dan Vega <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I got ya. So you would rather do something like >> > >> > user = new User(); >> > user.name = "dan" >> > >> > UserService.save(user) >> > >> > Thank You >> > Dan Vega >> > [email protected] >> > http://www.danvega.org >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 2:38 PM, Barney Boisvert <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> I love Hibernate, I just don't like the ActiveRecord pattern, where >> >> your entities have the persistence operations on them directly, >> >> instead of separated into DAOs. For example, with ActiveRecord you >> >> have this: >> >> >> >> u = new User() >> >> u.name = 'barney' >> >> u.save() >> >> >> >> The User type shouldn't know about persistence operations, in my >> >> opinion. Hibernate doesn't care where the persistence code lives, >> >> just that it's configured correctly. Grails (following Rails' model) >> >> puts it on the entities (the ActiveRecord pattern). Like I said, I >> >> works just dandy, but it feels wrong, and can lead you into some weird >> >> issues with transaction demarcation (among other things), because it >> >> encourages you to NOT think about separation of concerns. >> >> >> >> cheers, >> >> barneyb >> >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Dan Vega <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Scaffolding is great for generating a base controller but in the end >> >> > as >> >> > you >> >> > said you most likely be rolling your own. I found that controllers in >> >> > Grails >> >> > are extremely simple to write and in single line (via spring) you can >> >> > inject >> >> > your services which is great. As far as active record goes you will >> >> > have >> >> > to >> >> > forgive my lack of knowledge but I don't know much about it. I do >> >> > know >> >> > that >> >> > Grails uses hibernate for the persistance layer, can you explain what >> >> > you >> >> > don't like about that? >> >> > >> >> > Thank You >> >> > Dan Vega >> >> > [email protected] >> >> > http://www.danvega.org >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Barney Boisvert <[email protected]> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> One gripe I had with Grails is that it's ActiveRecord style >> >> >> persistence. That's as expected, of course, but I'm not a fan. >> >> >> It's >> >> >> simple to wrap up with DAO-style persistence to hide the fact. I'm >> >> >> also not much of a fan of scaffolding, because you invariably end up >> >> >> having to customize, and then you can't regenerate without losing >> >> >> the >> >> >> customizations. You can go crazy with your scaffolding templates to >> >> >> mitigate some of the issue, but it's still hard to get it all right. >> >> >> >> >> >> All that said, for getting something out the door quickly it's >> >> >> awesome. >> >> >> >> >> >> cheers, >> >> >> barneyb >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 11:19 PM, Henry <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Has anyone used Rails? loved it? >> >> >> > >> >> >> > I just read a book on introductory of Groovy and Rails. I wish CF >> >> >> > can >> >> >> > be that easy. I didn't have high hope for CF9's hibernate >> >> >> > integrations before, but now I really wish Adobe got it right. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Is it possible to run CFGroovy (with Rails) for M&C, and run CF >> >> >> > for >> >> >> > V? Just a thought. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Henry Ho >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> Barney Boisvert >> >> >> [email protected] >> >> >> http://www.barneyb.com/ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Barney Boisvert >> >> [email protected] >> >> http://www.barneyb.com/ >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Barney Boisvert >> [email protected] >> http://www.barneyb.com/ >> >> > > > > > -- Barney Boisvert [email protected] http://www.barneyb.com/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CFCDev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfcdev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
