see below... On Thu, 2002-01-10 at 14:55, Dmitri Colebatch wrote: > My _personal_ view, is that writing jdbc code should be left to frameworks,
Ok, so Castor is good then.... > ... > becomes trickier, and you end up writing your own mini-container of sorts > (imho). I agree... > Depending on what you want from castor, it may or may not be a good idea. > in our case, we found problems in the areas of it we wanted, and there was > concern in our team over the reliability of it. I would also be considering This scares me, where did you find problems? > entity beans - the main reason we looked at castor was the shared access on > query results, so I could have two "findAll" methods running, and if I plan on using Castor only for the DAO classes (per the J2EE pattern). I'd like to: A) Not write JDBC B) Take advantage of shared access on query results like you mentioned. This means I *will* be using EJB. I'm just wondering if replacing the innards of DAO classes (or replacing them altogether) with JDO calls instead of JDBC calls is a smart idea on two fronts: A) System design flaws this might introduce. B) Quality of Castor when utilized in this fashion. (I don't quite understand all the transaction and context stuff involved in EJB's yet). > were both read only, there would be no lockouts. This to me is the biggest > disadvantage of entity beans as they currently stand, I for one dont see why > the container doesn't provide a read-only equivalent of the finder > method.... I'm not sure I understand this. You want read only calls to lock each other out? Thanks, -ryan > anyway, my 2c, not sure if its any help. > > cheers > dim > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ryan Marsh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Dmitri Colebatch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 4:49 AM > Subject: Re: [JBoss-user] Updating CastorJDO plugin for 2.4.4 > > > > I am considering using Castor with a new J2EE application we are > > developing. I had planned to use it within the DAO classes to simplify > > them and eliminate the need to write jdbc/SQL code by hand. > > > > Is this a good idea in your opinion? Or should I just write the jdbc > > code? > > > > Input from anyone else is welcome too. > > > > -ryan > > > > On Wed, 2002-01-09 at 22:38, Dmitri Colebatch wrote: > > > > On 2002.01.09 21:45:44 -0500 Paul McLachlan wrote: > > > > > How do I do inheritance with cmp2? Maybe that is why Castor will > > > survive. > > > > > > > > Maybe. I don't know how to do polymorphism w/cmp2. But how can you > build > > > > a big system w/o decarative tx and security ;-)? > > > > > > > > From the little I've looked into the jdo spec, it looks to me as if > the > > > > persistence mechanism is pretty similar to what you need for ejb2. So > > > > perhaps soon we will see something with both the metaprogramming of > ejbs > > > > and the oo-ness of jdo. > > > > > > can I pop my 2c in here.... take it as you will. > > > > > > firstly, David, without seeming rude.... you do know that castor doesn't > aim > > > to be compliant with the JDO spec, but rather aims to solve the same > problem > > > in a similar fashion (my understanding) > > > > > > we recently switched back to entity beans, after having a dabble with > > > castor, attracted by the rich feature set, mainly the polymorphism, > shared > > > locking etc.. however, the further we got into it, the more problems we > > > had, specifically with the polymorphism, which was the main advantage it > has > > > over entity beans. we switched back because it was decided we couldn't > > > spend any more time looking into the aforementioned issues. > > > > > > having said that, castor can run inside an ejb container, and be used in > > > conjunction with session and message driven beans, and still execute in > the > > > same tx scope. yes you lose the declaritive tx scoping, and security, > but > > > I'd argue the pros and bigger than the cons..... except of course that > you > > > are using something that is completely non-spec (but very portable). > > > > > > I'm not really arguing one way or the other, just sharing our experience > > > with it... and perhaps my thoughts on what is and isn't important in > the > > > decision... I'd be happy to hear of others' thoughts on both those > issues. > > > > > > cheesr > > > dim > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > JBoss-user mailing list > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user > > -- > > "...visit a dog show. Or a gathering of people who believe they have > > been abducted by aliens in UFOs. People are demonstrably insane when > > it comes to assessing non-human sentience." > > -- Jaron Lanier > > > > http://www.ryanmarsh.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > JBoss-user mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user -- "...visit a dog show. Or a gathering of people who believe they have been abducted by aliens in UFOs. People are demonstrably insane when it comes to assessing non-human sentience." -- Jaron Lanier http://www.ryanmarsh.com _______________________________________________ JBoss-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
