See below...
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian N. Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Friday, May 07, 1999 7:23 PM
Subject: Re: Seduction by perceived ease of use,was RE: Granularity of EJB
Obj ects
>Chris wrote:
>>
>>On partitioning the graph, it may depend on the underlying technology.
>
>My point exactly. I seek entity design heuristics which minimize the
>human intervention required to map into persistence, REGARDLESS OF THE
>UNDERLYING TECHNOLOGY. That is, I'm looking for entity persistence
>*portability* guidelines, so that I don't have to master designing for
>alternate persistence mechanisms. Small, disjoint entities seem the
>best *general* pattern for easing persistence mapping.
>
>>With oodb ... isolation on graph updates is not too hard.
>
>But OODB strategies aren't generally applicaple to portable
>bean persistence. Entity designs which expect an OODB would
>be a pain to persist via O-R mapping. Mind you, I'll be the
>first to celebrate when RDBs are irrelevant.
I would not be surprised if OODBs became irrelevant. You can already mimic
OODB functionality with EJB. If you add querying capabilities, allow "local"
EBs and consider an efficient implementation you essentially have a
configurable, standards-based OODB.
Imre Kifor
Valto Systems
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
