Hi Saem, Yes, thanks that helps. Personally I like my application to have layers (guess that shows my age). Trouble with the method approach is that the interface layer needs to know (and pass on) that there will be database activity. I like a model where that is not it's concern.
Groeten, Friso Op dinsdag 31 mei 2016 08:44:53 UTC+2 schreef Saem Ghani: > > Hi Groeten, > > I've looked at both, and the latter didn't seem maintained, and really > seems quite stale at this point. I've used, and contribute to the former, > and been pretty happy with it. We did run into issues with injecting a > DSLContext in that you could only connect to a single database, but I had > one of my developers at the time contribute a patch that lets you inject > different/multiple contexts into each method. > > I prefer the per method injection, as not every method in a resource will > necessarily require a database connection, so from that stand point it's > nicer that it's per method. > > Hope that helps > > On Thursday, April 21, 2016 at 3:12:35 AM UTC-7, [email protected] > wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> I'm looking to integrate jOOQ with Dropwizard. I found this >> <https://github.com/benjamin-bader/droptools/tree/master/dropwizard-jooq> >> and this <https://github.com/djhworld/dropwizard-jooq> module. Is >> anybody here using these? If so: what are the pros and cons/dos and don'ts? >> Or should I just integrate it myself? >> >> Furthermore any opinions on the difference in patterns? The first one >> uses a bundle and you inject the DSLContext in each request. The second one >> sets up the DSLContext in the run method of the Application and keeps it >> available for any request to use. >> >> Groeten, >> >> Friso >> >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "dropwizard-user" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
