[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 22/04/2002 03:59:43 PM:
Actually Jon,
Torque and crossdb are quite a bit different. Torque is pre
generated and requires some preliminary setup and doesn't deal with
SQL statements directly. Whereas crossdb is on the fly and is an
object oriented way of
on 4/21/02 11:38 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
iq.addAutoIncrementColumn(emp_id);
And for databases without an auto-increment feature??
FYI, Torque looks at what database driver you are using an will generate the
right SQL/process to emulate auto-increment (assuming your
I never said they were the same. I said that crossdb is a few generations
behind Torque in design and thinking.
In the sense that Torque is an object-relational tool and crossdb is not,
Torque has a newer design. That does not mean relational tools do not have
a place in Java anymore.
You
For dbs without an auto_inc feature, that db implementation would ignore this or
handle it accordingly. Up to that implementation.
Travis
Original Message
From: Jon Scott Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 2002-04-22
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Subproject
Thanks Leo, I couldn't have answered this better myself. ;-)
Travis
Original Message
From: Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 2002-04-22
To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Subproject Proposal - crossdb
I never said they were the same. I said that crossdb is a
From: Leo Simons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Torque is a persistence layer that uses O/R mapping to use a database
to provide persistence. A persistence layer is a handy tool in many
server applications.
CrossDB is a database abstraction layer that uses the Factory and the
Builder pattern
on 4/22/02 12:19 AM, Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I never said they were the same. I said that crossdb is a few generations
behind Torque in design and thinking.
In the sense that Torque is an object-relational tool and crossdb is not,
Torque has a newer design. That does not mean
Right...like using JSP over Velocity is a choice. That said, JSP still
sucks. :-)
-1 - you're wrong. JSP doesn't suck.. .
IT SUCKS REALLY MAJORLY BAD! ;-)
I'm sorry. I don't see that. Torque can do everything crossdb can do and
more.
Yeah, I'm not seeing a compelling need served here
You do not have to use an O/R layer that abstracts you away from the
database you are using so much that it limits your ability to use the
DB's functionality in something resembling a db-natural way.
That is like trying to argue that using ECS is the way to write HTML.
Sometimes it is.
Torque doesn't have a 'newer design'. It has a more mature design. Torque
has been around for about 3-4 years now.
SQL's been around for 20. APIs to create SQL statements have been
around for about as long.
Which has advantages over O/R, which is the reason not everyone uses O/R
for
on 4/22/02 10:00 AM, James Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You do not have to use an O/R layer that abstracts you away from the
database you are using so much that it limits your ability to use the
DB's functionality in something resembling a db-natural way.
That is like trying to argue
on 4/22/02 10:40 AM, Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Torque doesn't have a 'newer design'. It has a more mature design. Torque
has been around for about 3-4 years now.
SQL's been around for 20. APIs to create SQL statements have been
around for about as long.
Java hasn't been around
on 4/22/02 11:15 AM, Michael A. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Speaking of which, why isn't torgue a top-level Jakarta subproject? Last
I looked, it appeared to be completely independent of Turbine. Plus, as
you say here, it also has a large developer and user base. Does the
Torque
Torque has been separated for about a year now.
We haven't found a reason to make it a top level project yet.
I really don't understand why the location of a set of code matters.
The one reason I can think of is exposure.
Which could be seen as a good one.
- Leo
--
To unsubscribe,
We haven't found a reason to make it a top level project yet.
I really don't understand why the location of a set of code matters.
Get over the mental blocks and just use the code because it is good code,
good design, not because of what CVS repo it lives in.
The exposure and not the
On Mon, 22 Apr 2002, Jon Scott Stevens wrote:
on 4/22/02 11:15 AM, Michael A. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Speaking of which, why isn't torgue a top-level Jakarta subproject? Last
I looked, it appeared to be completely independent of Turbine. Plus, as
you say here, it also has a large
I'm not sure what all the fuss is about here, but the fact of the matter is that if
you were to do a survey of developers using databases (SQL), my guess is that you
would find that the majority probably still use hard sql statements. A lot of people
don't see the need to use a high level
On Mon, 22 Apr 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
jon, are you a bitter man? ;-)
This should answer your question:
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/jon.html
(yes, I know it was rhetorical)
regards,
michael
Travis
Original Message
From: Jon Scott Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
on 4/22/02 1:47 PM, Michael McCallum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
jon, are you a bitter man? ;-)
I think the point he (Jon) is trying to make is why write another tool when
there are entirely suitable ones out there already.
You would be far better off adding you insights to an existing
on 4/22/02 1:08 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I'm not sure what all the fuss is about here, but the fact of the matter is
that if you were to do a survey of developers using databases (SQL), my guess
is that you would find that the majority probably still use hard sql
on 4/22/02 2:27 PM, Ellis Teer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I had considered using Torque before I was ready to give Turbine a try.
Because it's subproject I had the impression that it was dependent on
Turbine. This delayed me using it by a number of months. It's
placement as a subproject in
Well it's beyond a starting project and it works and people use it. For what it's
for, it works good.
Travis
Original Message
From: Jon Scott Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 2002-04-22
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Subproject Proposal - crossdb
on 4/22/02
Jon Scott Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
on 4/22/02 12:19 AM, Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You also left out all the code related to getting the 'conn'
object. Torque
abstracts all that away so it isn't necessary at all.
Which is not valid in every use case. CrossDB uses a
On Mon, 22 Apr 2002, Daniel Rall wrote:
CrossDB and Torque are entirely different layers. There's no reason
for someone to use CrossDB instead of Torque unless they're either a)
trying to avoid or circumvent O/R entirely, or b) trying to build an
O/R framework.
I think (a) is a reasonably
Jon Scott Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 23/04/2002 07:35:40 AM:
on 4/22/02 2:27 PM, Ellis Teer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I had considered using Torque before I was ready to give Turbine a
try.
Because it's subproject I had the impression that it was dependent on
Turbine. This
Jon Scott Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 23/04/2002 09:05:56 AM:
on 4/22/02 4:08 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On a serious note, being a top level project means that more people
will
find the project.
However, it seems that the problem isn't finding the project.
on 4/22/02 4:27 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll buy that. I know that when I first saw the *URL*, I tnhought it was
tied to Turbine.
http://jakarta.apache.org/torque/
Feel better now?
-jon
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands,
Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Torque has been separated for about a year now.
We haven't found a reason to make it a top level project yet.
I really don't understand why the location of a set of code matters.
The one reason I can think of is exposure.
Which could be seen as a
lol. nice.
Travis
Original Message
From: Jon Scott Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 2002-04-22
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Subproject Proposal - crossdb
on 4/22/02 4:27 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll buy that. I know that when I first
...and it would be foolish to argue with the 'right' angles of
orthogonality. ;)
-Ellis
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
You do have to admit it does seem a bit of a violation of orthogonality.
Then again, I never really cared for helicopters anyhow ;-)
-Andy
On Mon, 2002-04-22 at 17:35,
I think as a sub-project of Torque is probably a good idea taking into consideration
all the conversation in regards to this. On the one hand, you have the high level OR
concept which should be used, should being the important term here. But on the other
hand, a person should be able to use
Jon Scott Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Village abstracts JDBC, not databases. Torque uses Village in some
places in order to make the code cleaner and simpler.
After using them both for a couple years now, I've come to the
conclusion that the database abstraction layer which Torque
Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Which has advantages over O/R, which is the reason not everyone
uses O/R for everything. I'd say it is a choice instead of a
problem.
Right...like using JSP over Velocity is a choice. That said, JSP still
sucks. :-)
A strange comparison. JSP and
Michael McCallum [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
jon, are you a bitter man? ;-)
I think the point he (Jon) is trying to make is why write another
tool when there are entirely suitable ones out there already. You
would be far better off adding you insights to an existing project
than starting a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2002, Daniel Rall wrote:
CrossDB and Torque are entirely different layers. There's no reason
for someone to use CrossDB instead of Torque unless they're either a)
trying to avoid or circumvent O/R entirely, or b) trying to build an
O/R framework.
35 matches
Mail list logo
