I'm using Swing instead of JSP.
On Sunday, November 05, 2000 9:04 PM, Cory Adams [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> Thanks for that update.
>
> Do you or does anyone else know of the MVC (model - view - control) pattern
> used with JSP - Servlets and EJB? I have read that a single servlet
> becomes that controlling mechanism to the EJBs. I wondering how that is
> done?
>
> Cory
>
> At 10:23 PM 11/5/00 +0100, Frank Eggink wrote:
> >My personal trade off was:
> >
> >Why not CMP 2.0 style:
> >- Too scared to use it for real as it is not even officially there ...
> >
> >Why choose for CMP 1.1?
> >- CMP is more portable (across db's).
> >- Working already towards EJB2.0.
> >- The claim is CMP can be optimized better (I would be happy to know more
> details about that, until that time it is a bit
> >of a bet on a blackhorse for me).
> >
> >Why choose for BMP?
> >- I do not know yet whether I'll run into trouble with complex and highly
> flexible queries requirements
> >for Query By Example forms. The requirement for extra flexibility could
> become an argument.
> >
> >I would say if you can spend the time learning enough about CMP 1.1 I
> would go for that as a first option. The EJB1.1
> >specs are even written so that you can sub class a CMP bean to create a
> BMP bean.
> >
> >
> >One of the biggest disadavantages of EJB's is the tremendous amount of
> redundant code you have to write. Add for
> >instance a field to a bean. You'll have to change three files minimum and
> don't make mistakes as that will cost you time.
> >This disadavantage applies to both CMP and BMP and will apply to EJB2.0 as
> well.
> >
> >
> >What I'm doing is using EJB1.1 CMP and generate beans and stuff using a
> slightly more advanced bean
> >generator then the standard ones. Based on a datamodel (Entity-Relation)
> it generates a set of beans for
> >your application (including the remote and home interfaces and the *.xml
> files of course). The generated
> >beans include the fields, the finder queries, the additional methods to
> retrieve related beans etc.
> >
> >As an additional bonus the beans include a more abstract way to access the
> properties (myBean.getProperty(int index))
> >as the client side of orion does not allow reflection. I use that to
> generate forms and tables on the client.
> >
> >The generator adds a tremendous flexibility (I can switch to BMP / EJB2.0
> easily), makes CMP 1.1 managable and
> >keeps me away from EJB2.0 while it is still too early for me. For the
> rest: Im a notoruios mifftyper and am able to
> >spend tons of time debug typos in 2638 lines of very closely resembling
> code. That problem is solved as well :-)
> >
> >
> >Frank
> >
> >On Saturday, November 04, 2000 12:10 AM, Cory Adams
> [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> >> At 11:44 PM 11/3/00 +0100, Robert Krueger wrote:
> >> >At 11:23 03.11.00 , you wrote:
> >> >>I have looked through the 2.0 spec and find the chapters regarding CMP to
> >> >>be daunting. It appears as though the complexity of writing my own
> SQL in
> >> >>BMP has to be balanced against learning an entire new way of managin
> >> >>persistence within the XML deployment descriptors which seems to be no
> less
> >> >>or perhaps even more complicated than BMP????
> >> >>
> >> >>Or am I missing something with regard to CMP being easier?
> >> >
> >> >yes, two things:
> >> >
> >> >1. your code including the queries is guaranteed to be portable between
> ejb
> >> >servers and databases (that's the theory)
> >> >2. you cannot possibly make optimizations using BMP that the container
> can
> >> >make using CMP
> >> >
> >> >why do you have to use ejb2.0 CMP? you didn't mention 1.1 cmp as an
> >> >alternative?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Hmmm..... I can find even less regarding 1.1 CMP. I have the ORielly book
> >> as well as the Mastering EJB books. The 2.0 spec is what I'm using because
> >> I would think (perhaps wrongly) that EJB 2.0 would maybe be easier and or
> >> offer more functionality??? Chapters 9 and 10 are over 100 pages which
> >> have to do with CMP. The last thing I need to do is learn another query
> >> language which is what some of the 2.0 spec seemed to indicate I would need
> >> to do....
> >>
> >> I also understand points 1 and 2 above but they do not address my original
> >> question of the relative complexity between BMP and CMP. Basically 1 and 2
> >> are irrelevant to me if I can not implement CMP and can not practically
> >> compare the relative complexity between the two because I just don't
> >> understand CMP so I will keep digging through examples and utilize the post
> >> that has been helpful that somebody posted earlier today :
> >> http://www.execpc.com/~gopalan/java/entity.html .
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Cory
> >>
> >>
> >> >regards,
> >> >
> >> >robert
> >> >
> >> >>Thanks,
> >> >>
> >> >>Cory
> >> >
> >> >(-) Robert Kruger
> >> >(-) SIGNAL 7 Gesellschaft fur Informationstechnologie mbH
> >> >(-) Bruder-Knau?-Str. 79 - 64285 Darmstadt,
> >> >(-) Tel: 06151 665401, Fax: 06151 665373
> >> >(-) [EMAIL PROTECTED], www.signal7.de
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
