2010/1/29 Robert Krüger <[email protected]>: > What I am most curious about is what kind of mapping to tables one can come > up with as I cannot see how you will be able to map a domain model > implemented using the constructs of Qi4j (and keeping the current query > semantics, provided I understood them correctly) to a schema that will not > lead to completely catastrophic performance (you'll need SAP style "sizing") > or will have such an artificial table structure that reporting (IMHO the by > far most valid reason for using an RDBMS followed by the widespread > availability of hosting options that are accepted by conservative customers) > will be difficult at best.
My starting point would be; * Tables exists and populated. The structure was defined by a previous application or team, and will not change. Meaning, it is outside the scope of Qi4j to map an arbitrary domain model to an RDBMS, and only pull in an existing schema with all its ugliness, try to hide it and re-exposed via specific code for it. This can probably be done in many ways, but I don't think that an arbitrary domain model in Qi4j should be possible to map to an arbitrary SQL schema. After all, it is possible for programmers to do additional 'mapping' in Qi4j-to-Qi4j code. As for "search for all HasName", RDBMS support doesn't mean that we will try to do queries against the raw data via the Fluent Query API. I think that is a loosing battle not worth fighting. However, named native queries could be used for direct SQL, and the developer is in control. Hopefully, having RDBMS support will bring people in, and quickly convert them from stone age SQL mentality to more modern data modeling techniques. Cheers -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug _______________________________________________ qi4j-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
