I believe the possibilities of discussion could advance if you could provide a small example of how data is accessed currently versus how the same data would be accessed with SDO.
-Adrian --- On Fri, 3/12/10, Rodrigo Lima <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Rodrigo Lima <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier > To: [email protected] > Date: Friday, March 12, 2010, 6:55 PM > I believe that without further > research on SDO, XQuery and XPath, we're > unable to advance the possibilities and discussion. > The data layer (not just DB) must be divided into the > minimum degree 2 > responsibilities. > Were they: > 1) Physical Data > 2) Logical Data > > This concept is called a Data Services Layer. > Please, this is not WEB Service. > > I do not look like the owner of the truth, however, I see > that there are > many gains have this layer as an asset beyond the Entity > Manager. > > > 2010/3/12 Ruth Hoffman <[email protected]> > > > Hi Rodrigo: > > I'm really not understanding your arguments. Could you > elaborate? > > > > > > Rodrigo Lima wrote: > > > >> David, > >> > >> SDO is intended to give applications an > easy-to-use, uniform programming > >> model for accessing and updating data, regardless > of the underlying source > >> or format of the data. > >> > >> > > Isn't that what the Entity Engine does? What am I > missing here? > > > > The Service Data Objects (SDO) API allows client > applications to read and > >> update the data through a typed or untyped > interface. > >> However, unlike a conventional Web service, at the > core of each data > >> service > >> is an XML data type. > >> > >> > > I don't understand, Web services are all about XML > data types. > > > > The network is accessed again only when the > client wants to apply the data > >> changes to the source. > >> > >> > > What does SDO have to do with network access? Isn't > this just keeping stuff > > in memory (caching ) vs. writing to persistent > storage? > > > > Disconnected data access contributes to a > scalable, efficient computing > >> environment because back-end system resources are > never tied up for very > >> long. > >> > >> > > In real life, I found the opposite to be true. > Enterprises spend more time > > and effort synchronizing their back-end data resources > then they do using > > them. Performance, reliability and usability always > suffer. This is the > > age-old argument of centralized vs decentralized > computing. Maybe I don't > > understand what you are trying to say here? > > > > I suggest also apply the concept of SDO with > XQuery and XPath > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> 2010/3/12 David E Jones <[email protected]> > >> > >> > >> > >>> The SDO stuff (that was originally WDO) seems > to be more related to the > >>> service engine in OFBiz than to the entity > engine. I might be > >>> misunderstanding that though... > >>> > >>> Whatever the case, what is it that you like > about SDO, or how does it > >>> make > >>> your life easier? > >>> > >>> -David > >>> > >>> > >>> On Mar 11, 2010, at 6:43 PM, Rodrigo Lima > wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> Hi David, > >>>> > >>>> I believe it is worth following in a path > parallel to the Entity Engine, > >>>> which already has its > >>>> value and trust already established. > >>>> A model that looks interesting data model > would be to create a layer as > >>>> > >>>> > >>> the > >>> > >>> > >>>> SDO (Service Data Objects > >>>> > >>>> > >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_Data_Objects) > >>> > >>> > >>>> to > >>>> services layer, which could easily be used > by various technologies UI > >>>> > >>>> > >>> Tier. > >>> > >>> > >>>> A great detail is the question of objects > typed and untyped. > >>>> > >>>> Some might say that this issue is easily > solved with Web Services, > >>>> > >>>> > >>> however, > >>> > >>> > >>>> in practice, it is not so simple for many > platforms. > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> > >>>> Rodrigo > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> 2010/3/11 Nicolas Malin <[email protected]> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> -1 > >>>>> > >>>>> BJ, Ruth, > >>>>> > >>>>> Saying that OFBiz should move in the > same way that other projects is a > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> bit > >>> > >>> > >>>> stupid, and show that you've not fully > understand OFBiz and the entity > >>>>> engine. > >>>>> It is now 7 years I'm working on > OFBiz, and I have made the same error > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> at > >>> > >>> > >>>> the beginning as others, I did'nt > understood at the moment the beauty of > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> the > >>> > >>> > >>>> entityengine. > >>>>> Looking back at my hard start, I'm > glad having done this error, and now > >>>>> more than mastering the entity engine, > and all its abilities in tems of > >>>>> connections, abstractions, and more. > >>>>> The only fault I found was on huge > customers projects where there were > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> big > >>> > >>> > >>>> business needs. > >>>>> > >>>>> At LibrenBerry and Nereide, we've then > added generators to fill the > >>>>> gap, > >>>>> and this remove nothing from the > entity-engine capabilities, but add > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> more > >>> > >>> > >>>> smoothness in its use. The combination > form/screen/minilang is as strong > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> as > >>> > >>> > >>>> before and more stronger. For big business > needs, where java is needed, > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> the > >>> > >>> > >>>> generated code is more reliable (who never > has made on error on Strings > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> ?). > >>> > >>> > >>>> for an example, you can take a look to > neogia accounting code, to see > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> how > >>> > >>> > >>>> entity-engine and code generation > combination is valuable. > >>>>> > >>>>> From our side, it is sure that helping > development by generation is not > >>>>> revolutionizing OFBiz, and should not > do it, noone told to replace > >>>>> entity-engine with hibernate. > >>>>> Generation is adding a bigger > flexibility and a more reliable product. > >>>>> > >>>>> From my point of view, OFBiz is more > than just an ERP. It is also a > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> strong > >>> > >>> > >>>> base for any project, from the small ones > to the big ones. Adding MDA > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> tools > >>> > >>> > >>>> in its data model can only be a good > thing. > >>>>> > >>>>> Cheers, > >>>>> Nicolas > >>>>> > >>>>> Ruth Hoffman a écrit : > >>>>> > >>>>> +1 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> Thank you BJ. > >>>>>> Ruth > >>>>>> > ---------------------------------------------------- > >>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> "myofbiz" > >>> > >>> > >>>> [email protected] > >>>>>> > >>>>>> BJ Freeman wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Let me ask this, if all these > other approaches are better why is > >>>>>>> there > >>>>>>> not a application like ofbiz > done in them, without using ofbiz at > >>>>>>> all? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I keep getting the feeling > that those that want major changes don't > >>>>>>> really understand the design > goals of ofbiz. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> ======================= > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> BJ Freeman > >>>>>>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com > >>>>>>> Strategic Power Office with > Supplier Automation < > >>>>>>> http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93> > >>>>>>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to > Assist > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Chat Y! messenger: > bjfr33man > >>>>>>> Linkedin > >>>>>>> < > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>> http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro > >>> > >>> > >>>> > >>>>>>> [email protected] > sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> While reading the sentence > "There are many people out there who > >>>>>>>> don't > >>>>>>>> understand the Entity > Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> are > >>> > >>> > >>>> absolutely much more people "out there", > and I'm sure the OFBIZ > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> project > >>> > >>> > >>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on > asking "Hibernate", > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> "Spring", > >>> > >>> > >>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ > framework DID do a right thing - to provide > >>>>>>>> developers an integrated > framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the > >>>>>>>> developer can define > entity in one place and share the entity > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> definition > >>> > >>> > >>>> across different tiers, form persistence > to presentation. This kind > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> of > >>> > >>> > >>>> integration saved developers a lot from > typings and preserved > >>>>>>>> consistency across > different application tiers. But, this is not > >>>>>>>> what > >>>>>>>> Entity Engine itself can > provide. All gains come from the > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> integration. > >>> > >>> > >>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity > engine into a stand alone ORM > >>>>>>>> like tool, I bet its not > very attractive and only people familiar > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> with > >>> > >>> > >>>> OFBIZ already will use it. > >>>>>>>> On the other hand, if > there are another framework such as Grails > >>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>> can provide at least same > level of cross tier integration ability, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> while > >>> > >>> > >>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN > technologies (such as > >>>>>>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, > Spring for service tier component > >>>>>>>> composition, > >>>>>>>> Spring MVC for view tier > framework). Sounds a little bit attractive > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> than > >>> > >>> > >>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>>> Miles. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at > 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Hi David: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Nothing! I think this > is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> many > >>> > >>> > >>>> people out there who don't understand the > Entity Engine value > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> proposition. > >>> > >>> > >>>> That is why they keep asking for > "Hibernate" etc. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Here's some things I'd > consider as additions: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> * Maybe making a > separate component/webapp to manage the Entity > >>>>>>>>> Engine. > Take it out of WebTools. > >>>>>>>>> * Include in > that webapp any security/role management specific to > >>>>>>>>> the > Entity Engine. > >>>>>>>>> * Entity Engine > performance tools (or more information on how to > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> use > >>> > >>> > >>>> existing tools). > >>>>>>>>> * Better backup > tools (or more information on how to use existing > >>>>>>>>> tools). > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> More to come... > >>>>>>>>> Ruth > >>>>>>>>> > ---------------------------------------------------- > >>>>>>>>> Find me on the web at > http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword > >>>>>>>>> "myofbiz" > >>>>>>>>> [email protected] > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> David E Jones wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> If you could > change anything about the data tier in OFBiz > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> (basically > >>> > >>> > >>>> the Entity Engine), what would you > change? > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> All comments are > welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> see > >>> > >>> > >>>> used instead of the Entity Engine, please > describe what you like > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> about it > >>> > >>> > >>>> (like "I want to have an Java class for > each table in my database") > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> instead > >>> > >>> > >>>> of just mentioning the tool (like "let's > use Hibernate!"). > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Why am I asking? > This topic comes up every once in a while, and > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> it's > >>> > >>> > >>>> true that many suggestions never get > enough support to actually > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> happen (or > >>> > >>> > >>>> on further research it is decided that the > idea is not tenable), > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> but > >>> > >>> > >>>> brainstorming about them to get ideas in > the open is still a great > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> thing. > >>> > >>> > >>>> The history of OFBiz is full of things > like this where users and > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> more casual > >>> > >>> > >>>> contributors had ideas and saw > possibilities that others, even more > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> involved > >>> > >>> > >>>> contributors, totally missed or never > looked at that way. What I > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> think would > >>> > >>> > >>>> be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to > keep this mostly to > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> brainstorming > >>> > >>> > >>>> and not do too much comparing of ideas. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> BTW, if you want > to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> UI > >>> > >>> > >>>> tiers) please use the other threads on > those. If you'd like to > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> discuss > >>> > >>> > >>>> things that aren't specific to a tier look > for the "General" > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> thread. > >>> > >>> > >>>> -David > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> -- > >>>>> Nicolas MALIN > >>>>> Consultant > >>>>> Tél : 06.17.66.40.06 > >>>>> Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/ > >>>>> ------- > >>>>> Société LibrenBerry > >>>>> Tél : 02.48.02.56.12 > >>>>> Site : http://www.librenberry.net/ > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > > >
