If the performance penalty in question has to do with pass by reference vs
pass by value semantics on the arguments then local objects give you
something, but many appserver vendors already did it by default or with a
switch so it's probably only a win in terms of formalizing the behavior.
If it has to do with database access, then really nothing has changed,
especially if you're doing BMP. IMHO EJB 2.0 brings better CMP so more
people can make do with their appserver vendor's CMP and not have to resort
to BMP. It doesn't brighten the picture for people building BMP beans.
Cheers
Jay
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Fox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 12:58 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Local ejb or vanilla objects - aaaaggh!
I'm designing a new system and was intending to use a session bean facade
talking to a graph of "vanilla" java business objects. The persistence of
the vanilla objects is handled by a third party o/r tool.
Since the tool handles caching etc. as well as straight persistence, and
considering the performance problems (prior to invention of local entity
beans) of fine grained entity beans, we decided to forget entity beans
altogether.
However... now Sun has decided to invent local interfaces, I'm in a spin as
to whether I should use local ejbs instead of my vanilla objects, on the
other hand I'm not sure they would add anything since I'm not using CMP?
===========================================================================
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".
