I think the point Linda was making is that the spec should support EJB
implementations over platforms other than a standard RDBMS. I had suggested
requiring vendors to support the specified EJB QL BNF as a base but give
them the option to add their own extensions such as ORDER BY.


>From: Steve Muench <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Steve Muench <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: EJB 2.0: ORDER BY clause [was EJB-Spec: Why is List not a
>         valid              finder return type?]
>Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 08:53:04 -0700
>
>Richard,
>
>| > The issue of ORDER BY raises some interesting issues in this regard:
>| >
>| > Is the semantics of ordering defined by the database semantics (e.g.
>| > SQL semantics) or by Java semantics?  While maintaining Java semantics
>| > would seem desirable, it means that we cannot generally push the
>| > ordering down into the database,
>
>Not pushing it to the database will give horrible performance.
>
>| and that the ORDER BY clause be considered less then perfectly portable.
>I think
>| after EJB QL is in wide spread use we will discover other portability
>problems
>| (normal for a new language) and ORDER BY will be considered the least of
>these
>| problems.
>
>This might be a naive-sounding question, but is there any way
>in EJB 2.0 to allow developers to directly use the SQL language
>that many are already familiar with?
>
>It appears from my read of the EJB 2.0 spec that EJB developers are
>forced to use a kind of EJB QL language in the
>name of being able to think of their relational database
>as a black box. They cannot use standard SQL even if they
>wanted to. Well-performing applications absolutely
>need to exploit their back-end relational database to the hilt,
>and thinking of the database as a black box is not typically
>the way to maximize this performance.
>
>Not having some kind of an escape to use SQL, I believe, will
>force users to use Bean Managed persistence so they can exploit the
>full power of SQL for best performance.
>
>| Please let Sun know you need the ORDER BY clause before
>| the spec is finalized.
>
>EJB 2.0 needs an ability to use the full power of SQL,
>not just EJBQL. I'm probably off in left field on this,
>but this is what I think.
>
>Big companies pay a lot of money for their database
>to get the *potential* for excellent performance.
>Why shouldn't EJB allow their developers to eek every
>ounce of performance out of that database by using the full
>power of that database's SQL language?
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Steve Muench, Lead XML Evangelist & Consulting Product Manager
>BC4J & XSQL Servlet Development Teams, Oracle Rep to XSL WG
>Author "Building Oracle XML Applications", O'Reilly
>http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/orxmlapp/
>

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

===========================================================================
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".

Reply via email to