> "What I am trying to do is allow lazy-loading of related objects from data > object. So it contains some finder-related methods, which go and fetch the > data." > > I like this idea: lazy loading Aggregated/Composed ValueObjects from > ValueObject. Maybe have the ValueObject use the aggregated/composed beans > util object to do a lookup and retrieve the value object? Could solve the > problem of large data graphs, but at the cost of multiple network trips.
I don't like this idea! You're ending up writing two set of more or less similar code, one in value object and another in your ejbs. Honestly I'm starting to hate this valueobject pattern! In my application I ended up modeling everything (the graph I mean) as serializable dependent objects and simply pass them around. All ejb container dependent code is out of those dependent objects, inside a session fa�ade. And btw if web and ejb tiers on in the same jvm you don't really need value object, just wrap the access in a transaction. Imho it really is a design discussion, and by the above design I don't have to deal with value objects any more, I only use a finer grained one for listing. I'll be glad to hear what ejb gurus think. Comments? Ara. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Xdoclet-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xdoclet-user
