On Thursday, August 7, 2003, at 10:20 PM, jcd wrote:
Aren't we, in some respects, getting a bit overzealous about the Persistence Tier? Let's focus on getting the EJB life-cycle management and transaction hierarchies dialed and designed. Why not gear efforts to the production of a solid BMP implementation with Connection, Datasource, and Transaction management - get that dialed and define a pluggable OPTIONALthird-party persistence interface.
Sorry, CMP is my area of expertise, so I tend to get very excited.
What is the consensus out there regarding the use of BMP? Is there any desire to have the ability to 'unplug' any/all container persistence services in exchange for a smaller footprint, lighter weight implementation?
What do you mean here? BMP is very simple to implement. I expect to have a full implementation is a few weeks.
Concentrating efforts on the basic EJB container services might well prove to be a quicker track to a stable, performing implementation that can be extended to accommodate the various persistence approaches at a later time. It is my feeling that this approach could postpone much of the inevitable analysis paralysis that often accompanies 'The Persistence Debate." Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Geronimo is beating his drums to early release victory.
The initial code includes pool, cache, locking, CMT, BMT, a stateless session container, and a bunch or other basic services. We should be able to quickly have support stateless session bean, stateful session beans and bean managed entity beans. What is missing are big things like a TransactionManager, deployment, JMS, and Webservices.
-dain
/************************* * Dain Sundstrom * Partner * Core Developers Network *************************/
