On 18 Oct 00, at 15:26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> A primary key service *is* appropriate for the container but it is *not*
> appropriate for the container manufacturer. Such a decision is very
> application and domain specific.
One argument in favor of providing in the jBoss distribution an
MBean that provides a primary key service is "customer lock-in."
Since people who use this service will be taking advantage of a
feature that is not in the J2EE standard, we will force them to keep
using our container. So the upgrades and support revenue will keep
rolling in. We'll all be rich.
Just kidding. In general, I agree with the argument that this is not
an appropriate service for us to provide directly to EJB
components. There are two alternatives that I like:
(1) An EJB-component based solution as Rickard has advocated
(and for which he has provided a prototype).
(2) A persistence-manager based solution for container-managed
persistence. This solution would, of course, be database-specific.
Here I like the role that an MBean can play. In other words, the
persistence manager could look for a database-specific MBean to
which it could delegate the sequential primary key management.
I'm very sure that #1 is a good idea. I would like to provide support
in the persistence manager for CMP entities with sequential keys,
so I think that #2 might also be a good idea. But I haven't
prototyped it, nor have I spent more time thinking about it than it
took me to type it. So I'd love to hear some feedback.
-Dan
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
