Hi Martin, I don't want to flood the group with my files. Can you send me your email address, and I will forward the zip files to you.
Scott Weaver Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: Martin Poeschl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 12:53 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Turbine and DB2/400 what are the differences between DB2 and DB2/400 implementations? send me a zip and i'll check your stuff and add it to cvs - martin "Weaver, Scott" wrote: > Jacopo, > > Turbine is definitely a worthy solution and the peers methodology is SO much > easier to grasp then EJB's. I've been busy with projects other than > Turbine lately, but I was successful in getting the Turbine demo application > (newapp) to work flawlessly with DB2/400. I was also able to get Torque to > generate the peers AND the DB2/400 tables with zero modification on the > AS400 save for actually creating the database collection on the AS400 before > running Torque. > > Here is a run down of what I did to get Turbine/Peers/Torque to work for > DB2/400: > > 1. Create db2400 specific Torque stuff. > 2. Create a Turbine DB adapter for DB2/400. > 3. Had to modify the village api because it did some ResultMetaData checking > that did not work correctly for DB2/400 (isReadOnly always returns false). > > If you would like, I can send you the result of my blood, sweat and tears ;) > in a zip if you want it. It will put you ahead of the game in terms of > getting Turbine up and running with DB2/400. > > To the Turbine Project leaders, > > Would you consider this a worthy contribution to the Turbine project? I am > newbie when it comes to using the CVS. So far I've only used the CVS > (WinCVS as a client) to download source, never to upload. So, if you > consider this DB2/400 stuff a worthy contrib, let me know. > > Regards, > Scott Weaver > Rippe & Kingston System, Inc. > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jacopo Cappellato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 9:29 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Turbine and DB2/400 > > Dear Scott, > > at now I'm syuding the Turbine framework and I'm considering the possibility > to use DB2/400 as DBMS. > I've read from the turbine-user mail archive your messages about your work > on the Torque peer's implementation for DB2/400. > > Since I don't know if you've managed to work with Turbine and DB2/400, my > question is: > do you still think that is a good idea/solution working with DB2/400 peers? > If so, could you give me some hints on developing this implementation (e.g. > the DB2 implementation is a good starting point, what are the main > differences between DB2 and DB2400 implementations?)?. > > Thank you in advance! > > Jacopo > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
