On 21 Sep 00, at 9:16, Charles Crain wrote:
> >
> > 5- Where i can find more details/example about the
> > "facade pattern with a stateless session bean"
> > approach suggested by Dan OConnor?
>
> I'm not EXACTLY sure what you are talking about, but I think I can make
> a good guess. For maximum portability, you should let the container
> manage as much as possible. You can achieve the equivalent of
> client-demarcated transactions by using container-managed transactions
> (CMT), and using a stateless session bean as a proxy for your client.
> The client calls a stateless session bean method with the Required
> transaction attribute. That stateless bean in turn calls all the
> methods you want to call in a transaction. For just any client (i.e.,
> not one running within the app server), this is literally the ONLY way
> to ensure client portability.
>
This is exactly right. For anyone not familiar with the pattern, there
are also other reasons to use a session bean facade, such as
performance (aggragating remote calls), encapsulation (hiding your
object model from your presentation layer), and proper layering of
your design (a "sequence of calls" is often workflow or business
logic that belongs on a different tier from the client).
-Dan
> >
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Davide
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
> > http://im.yahoo.com/
> >
> > --
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
