Perhaps I did dig a bit too deep into this one.
--jason
On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, Burkhard Vogel wrote:
> Hi,
> just hold your horses, there are loads of legacy apps out there, which have
> to share the DB with the app-server. Thats why there is the commit option C
> which danch already mentioned.
> Burkhard
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jason Dillon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 12:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-user] EJB RDBMS Issue
>
>
> > > The ideal way is to do all such database modifications thru the ejb
> > > interface only, but, unfortunately, that is not the case for me. Any
> inputs
> > > on problems i might face?
> >
> > How about, why on earth would you do something like that? What external
> > thingy is going to delete records and leave your application in a state of
> > confusion. Are you trying to write a Microsoft application?
> >
> > I don't think there is part of the EJB spec that says what will happen
> when
> > some other application deletes a record, drops a table or reboots the
> > database. If it does, let me know... I am in for a good chuckle.
> >
> > On a positive note, you might want to reconsider the usage of entity beans
> if
> > the case truly is that you can not avoid the situation you described
> above.
> > Perhaps you want a session facade to a table or perhaps you don't really
> > want an EJB at all.
> >
> > --jason
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > JBoss-user mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> JBoss-user mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
>
_______________________________________________
JBoss-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
