> Other than productivity, I feel JDO code doesn't have the > expressiveness of the Low Level code. You find yourself with JDO code > adding annotations to influence the code, but these annotations don't > really say what you're trying to do.
Why not give examples of what you mean here? Using the JDO API means your persistence code is portable to other datastores. Using the lowlevel API means it isn't. As always, look at the list of pros and cons and decide based on your own application needs and future plans. There is no "right" answer so no point in pretending there is. In your case you say you don't plan on porting anywhere else, hence using the lowlevel API makes sense for you (as long as there isn't an amount of effort in learning it when already familiar with JDO). > JDO was designed for a regular relational database No it wasn't; the whole concept of JDO is datastore-independence. Yes, there are some ORM-specific annotations that are added (in JDO2) for specifics of mapping for RDBMS datastores and some can be adapted to other "mapped" datastores), but all DataNucleus docs define what is datastore-independent, and what is specific. --Andy (DataNucleus) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine for Java" group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-java@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
