Hi Jim,

Do you have one or multiple interfaces to your app server?  We are in the
situtation that we will have multiple end points for our data: our client,
third party software, other internal products which want to integrate with
ours, etc etc.  For that reason we have felt that session beans make for a
nice way to create "application views".  In other words, entity beans
provide the building blocks that session beans assemble to serve a
particular application / consumer.

The picture drawn is quite nice, but it also make sense from a performance
point of view.  Perhaps the most important point is that client
side(FAR-OUT, in your terminology) demarcated transactions is a big no-no,
performance wise.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Frentress [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, May 14, 1999 12:17 PM
> To:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:      Entity no more expensive than Session: WAS:
> findLargeAccounts - w hy bother?
>
> Imre made the statement and i must admit that i tend to agree. We use
> Session almost exclusively for bootstrap and client state.
>
> I'm less fond of "wrapping" entity with session than apparently most
> posters
> to this list. I have a feeling that it's because ITM is using EJB in
> production so we have to solve real-life problems rather than academic
> ones.
>
> I'm perfectly willing to be enlightened as to why I'm not properly
> educated
> on the topic. I can say that our system does not appear to be constrained
> on
> the appserver level (eg EJB) and as far as we can see, we're scalable
> there
> far into the future with clustering.
>
> So, who out there has a non-trivial system *in production* under EJB and
> has
> something to say about this?
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Imre Kifor [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, May 14, 1999 11:30 AM
> > To:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject:      Re: findLargeAccounts - why bother?
> >
>         <snip>The
> > idea is to treat both entities *and* collections of entities as "first
> > class" citizens. Since entity beans are no more expensive than session
> > beans, we use entities for the collections to take advantage of
> > CMP/caching/sharing and to have finer control of the bean instances. As
> a
> > matter of fact, we use session beans in our customer's architectures
> only
> > when client (or session) info has to be maintained on the server.
> >
>         <snip>
>
> ==========================================================================
> =
> 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".

===========================================================================
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".

Reply via email to