Imre made the statement and i must admit that i tend to agree. We use
Session almost exclusively for bootstrap and client state.
I'm less fond of "wrapping" entity with session than apparently most posters
to this list. I have a feeling that it's because ITM is using EJB in
production so we have to solve real-life problems rather than academic ones.
I'm perfectly willing to be enlightened as to why I'm not properly educated
on the topic. I can say that our system does not appear to be constrained on
the appserver level (eg EJB) and as far as we can see, we're scalable there
far into the future with clustering.
So, who out there has a non-trivial system *in production* under EJB and has
something to say about this?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Imre Kifor [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, May 14, 1999 11:30 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: findLargeAccounts - why bother?
>
<snip>The
> idea is to treat both entities *and* collections of entities as "first
> class" citizens. Since entity beans are no more expensive than session
> beans, we use entities for the collections to take advantage of
> CMP/caching/sharing and to have finer control of the bean instances. As a
> matter of fact, we use session beans in our customer's architectures only
> when client (or session) info has to be maintained on the server.
>
<snip>
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
