Jonathan Harley schrieb: > Indeed. Because JPA is such a limited standard (only covers > relational datastores, for one thing), Actually that is not quite true, JPA is not really limited to relational datastores, lets say it that way from its amount it covers pretty much everything Hibernate 3.0 has to offer, it just starts now that Hibernate for instance offers more than standard JPA and those areas do not have to be used.
I was really surprised that JPA is as extensive as it is given my experiences on those isses in the past. I once was burned with the OMG 1.0 standard and other so called standards which merely were non working marketing papers. And there is no real reason why JPA cannot work on an object storage as well. In fact Versant is working on a JPA version for their own stuff or already has it in place. > JDO products as well as > Hibernate and Toplink will offer many extensions to the JPA standard. > Users will have a choice of using proprietary extensions (in the > case of Hibernate and Toplink) that lock them in to one vendor, or > standardised extensions (JDO) that give them a wide choice of vendor. > Exactly, but the point is, there are no key issues why you have to lock yourself into it. In the future it probably will be, that it is best to code against jpa and use the extensions wisely, if needed (and in most cases it wont be needed) One thing for instance where it can make sense to lock yourself into a vendor API is if you want to use a delete abandoned entities feature. But most db apps I worked with never had the intention to use such a garbage colleciton mechanism on an active database.
