Adam , the coarse-grained entity pattern is deprecated if you are using the local entities of EJB2.0. I have remote stateless session beans talking to fine-grained local entities without any problems...
Colin. On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 08:54, Adam Lipscombe wrote: > Folks, > > Sorry, attached mail should have read "not every (reasonably dynamic) > persistent entity should be modelled by an entity EJB" > > i.e. drop the "bean". > > When do persistent database entities warrant an entity EJB? > > > Thanks - Adam > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Lipscombe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 16 October 2001 23:50 > To: A mailing list for Java(tm) 2 Platform, Enterprise Edition; > [EMAIL PROTECTED]; An interest list for Sun Java Center J2EE > Pattern Catalog > Subject: Architecture: When to use Entity Beans to model persistent > objects? > > > Folks, > > > I am interested in the frequently voiced opinion that not every (reasonably > dynamic) persistent entity bean should be modelled by an entity EJB. > I am designing a J2EE server consisting of client facing session beans, > action and modelfactory (valueobject factory) classes interfacing onto > persistent entity EJB's. > > Are there any rules of thumb as to when one should use an entity EJB to > model a persistent object? Any opinions? > > > Thanks in advance > > - Adam Lipscombe > > =========================================================================== > 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".
