On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 15:59, Kevin Wright <kev.lee.wri...@gmail.com> wrote: > The idea of silently having an object always persisted is certainly an > appealing one. > Shame it doesn't work so well in practice, in order to avoid issues of > persisting an object (or multiple related objects) in an inconsistent state > we need some form of transactions, or "checkpoints" where a session is > manually flushed/saved. > That's usually where the problems begin, especially with the involvement of > threads...
When I hear this, I think, that sometimes there is too much enterprise... ;-) I love plain simplicity of having an SQL template for example (or even have it as a stored procedure) and you just feed the date and go for it... No frameworks, no need to deal with limitations (I heard, Hibernate has issues with special db layouts, that have not been designed to work with Hibernate) - just plain direct code and plain SQL shipping the data without frameworks examining my objects via reflections. - And damn fast. - Just an experience I had developing an importer about a year ago. -- Martin Wildam -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
