Re: Dependent value classes

[Sunder]

I think a lot of people are confused over value objects and DVC.   Dependent value classes are not the same thing as dependent value objects that were added in EJB 2.0 Proposed Final Draft 1 and subsequently removed in EJB 2.0 Proposed Final Draft 2.     Dependent value classes are part of EJB 2.0 Proposed final draft (see section 10.3.3). I guess serializing is expensive but that’s assumed.   Sunder   -----Original Message----- From: A mailing list for Enterprise JavaBeans development [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tinou Bao Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 1:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Dependent value classes   I thought dependent classes didnt make it, instead local interfaces did. Anyways, one disadvantage is you can't offload the queries to the database. Another might be the cost of serializing/deserializing the objects. _________________________________________   Tinou Bao BAO Systems Chairman of the Board and Chief Software Architect www.baosys.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Sunder To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 10:51 AM Subject: [EJB-INT] Dependent value classes   �Dependent value classes were introduced in the EJB 2.0 spec. I would like to know if it’s a good idea to use serialized java Beans mapped to the database columns. That way, one does not need to change the EJB for database changes. All database Changes can be reflected in the java bean. Of course, the primary key will not be a part of this bean. Are there any drawbacks in doing this??   Sunder