> btw, I am not arguing that everyone write database code--Just that CMP is
> isn't an end all.
We're on the same page.
I have to admit that I am developing a CMP engine which is designed to
be good enough for that general case. But at the same time, I strictly
develop the session way. I advocate stateless session beans first, CMP
entity beans last.
> > My schema is actually coming from the Java object model. But in the
> > design phase there is a back-and-forth interaction between the more
> > flexible process side (Java object model) and the very strict relational
> > side (SQL). At the end of the day your Java object model borrows a lot
> > from the relational model, or you get too much friction.
> >
> Hmm. I like to think that DBA's help flush out a better object model. ;->
I'm still playing a lot with this but it looks to me that the entity
relational model is the one that works best. Not the strict SQL variety
which specifies the database schema, but the higher level one.
>From this one you can generate Java objects that look natural to the
developers, tie them into am SQL schema that is well normalized, and
even import/export them as XML.
> Sorry if I put words in your mouth. ;-> I do admit we are talking about
> mixing CMP and BMP where it makes sense. We are all banking on a healthy
> specification and market where ejb vendors will make our life easier.
> Scaling is all about good design and I just need tools which are developed
> by folks who understand this...it is not merely stateless versus stateful
> design.
And I totally agree with you that present day CMP solutions are not good
enough.
arkin
>
> -phil ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> Phillip A. Lindsay
> eBuilt, Inc. - http://www.ebuilt.com
===========================================================================
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".
