> Hi
> After going through so much discussion there are a few things that lie
> still unresolved
>
> 1."Entity beans should be ideally accessed through Session beans"- This is
> what all the Ejb gurus say. If that is the case, why make entity beans
> remote objects at all?. The answer that some app.servers might optimize
> remote calls to local calls when the beans are co-located(i.e in the same
> VM) is side-stepping this issue.
While SB access is the ideal, and in our case is the methodology of choice,
this does not preclude one from opening up certain EB's for remote access.
There may be cases where allowing access to a specific EB may be desirable.
> 2. Since Entity beans are supposed to be accessed from a Session bean(The
> "facade" pattern) why do we have separate transaction attributes for Entity
> beans- these attributes could be controlled from the Session Bean itself.
If you accept my response to 1, then 2 is implied.
> 3."Another function of Entity beans is persistence". The persistence
> mechanism for Enitity beans in EJB1.1 was fairly crude. The EJB2.0
> addresses some of these issues,but it is yet to be finalized. It might
> bring forth other issues. See
> http://www.onjava.com/pub/a/onjava/2001/02/28/ejb.html.
We are pretty happy with EJB1.1 persistence. I believe our primary complaints
are related to Finders. However, our application is relatively simple, so we
have not run into some issues others have had to deal with.
However, having written several DB access layers, I am happy to leave all of
that with the container developers.
tim.
===========================================================================
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".
