Jon Stevens wrote:
> Therefore, it really does not matter how or where you get the
> connection...just that the Peer object can get a connection. The
> "old-non-j2ee" style that we are currently using in Turbine works perfectly
> fine and even if we do need to plug in a different connection mechanism in
> the future, it simply means changing some auto generated code. Not a big
> deal. I don't see a reason at this point to change it or even switch to
> something else. I really don't see the need to have JNDI or Container
> managed connections.
>
> Prove me wrong.
We still need to have a sound mechanism for executing SQL statements
from the application code. Peers are cool, but OR mapping isn't
everything
you can do with a relational DB. When you want the DB do do some really
twisted stuff for you, the results won't really correspond to any
concrete
objects... (imagine some complicated joins plus a lot of grouping
clauses).
There are things that the DB can do in a flash, that would take ages
if you pulled the objects from it and made the operations on the app
side.
Another example is running stored procedures.
My original intent when proposing making our pooling system J2EE
complaiant,
was to make it compatible on the back-end, and not necceserily on the
front
end.
1. If turbine pooling can *use* J2EE connection pools, a Turbine
application can
be seamlesly installed on an J2EE server, and take advantage of it's
capabilities.
2. If turbine pooling *emulates* J2EE connection pools on the
application side,
programmers with J2EE experience would feel more 'at home' while using
Turbine.
These are two distinct goals, of wich the 1st one is more important.
It's also
easier to achieve because it desn't impose changes to existing
application code.
Rafal
--
Rafal Krzewski
Senior Internet Developer
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+48 22 8534830 http://e-point.pl
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
