In short,
>From the O'Reilly book "Enterprise Java Beans" by Richard Monson-Haefel, pg. 23
"A godd rule of thunb is that entiy beans model business concepts that can be
expressed as nouns."
prafulkumar_naphade wrote:
> Hello
> Given a object model for a system what can be the guidelines to decide which
> class should be entityBean
> And which should not?
> Regards,
> Praful
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Filip Hanik [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 1999 11:40 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: A question about one to many relationships among
> tables
>
> Yes,
> An entity bean is very expensive. It is a remote object and contains
> heavy
> transaction logic. should only be used when you need a remote
> interface
>
> I would have entity beans reflect the data in Table1.
> these entity beans could also contain the logic of inserting,
> reading and
> updating data in table2 and table3. This data would be regular java
> objects.
> So in the entity bean for table1 I would have
>
> Vector getTable2Data(...)
> void deleteTable2Data(table2RowObject)
> void addTable2Data(table2RowObject)
>
> This way the main entity bean is in charge of the data in table2 and
> 3 and
> you can control you database access in a better way.
>
> Let me know if you want a more detailed description.
>
> Filip Hanik
> Verge Softawre
>
> Sanjay Nambiar
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent by: A cc:
> mailing list for Subject: A question
> about one to many relationships among tables
> Enterprise
> JavaBeans
> development
> <EJB-INTEREST@jav
> a.sun.com>
>
> 11/17/99 03:33 AM
> Please respond to
> A mailing list
> for Enterprise
> JavaBeans
> development
>
> Hi,
> Our application typically has the following scenario:
>
> 1>For Every Record of Table1 we have multiple records in Table2,in
> turn
> whose every record has multiple records in Table3.
> As the data volumes are very high,I wanted to know if the approach
> given
> below is right
> In the entity bean of Table 1 we have an extra attribute of say
> "Vector
> type" which would contain the bean references of all the entitybeans
> corresponding to Table 2.The same is done for the relationship
> between
> table
> 2 and table 3
> In the entityBean for Table 1 we query the Table 2 and populate the
> entitybean instances of Table 2 from Table 1 entitybean itself and
> store
> the
> bean references in the Vector and then this Table 1 entitybean is
> accessed
> from the sessionbean for all the records.
>
> EJBServer supports bean managed persistence and the database is
> Informix
>
> Any comments ....or an alternative better approach
> SANJAY Nambiar
>
> ===========================================================================
> 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".
>
> ===========================================================================
> 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".
>
> ===========================================================================
> 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".
===========================================================================
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".
