Sorry -- my FUBAR -- overlooked the bit about the DAO pattern because I was looking at a reply to the message and not the message itself. I would still tend to use Session Beans for the following reasons;
1> (actually this is unrelated to the Session Beans) Utilise a database Factory class which in this case returns the database connection out of the EJB container's database pool via JNDI lookup. Simplifiying database connection management considerably. 2> If you implement Session Beans now, it will make it easier to migrate the DAOs later should this prove necessary. 3> Just to get the transactional boundaries anyway, saves you having to manually write code to get the transactions, even if these are incredibly simple in nature. Black box last moments; "Did the 'flaps down' transaction update correctly? Oh no here's a SQLException! rollback! rollback! rollback! Oh, shi<application hits side of mountain>". On the other hand, maybe for an inexperienced developer writing a session bean just for simple transaction control is unnecessary complexity, like trying to land your jumbo jet on a swamp. I won't write the black box last moments for that one. regs scot. > > First Session EJBs are usually used to implement the 'Facade > > Pattern'. This is definitely A Good Idea. Plain old java > > objects will not have access to the declarative transactions > > of the EJB container, therefore even if you used POJOs to > > facade your calls to the Entities, each and every call to > > each individual entity method is a separate transaction. > > > > The original poster just stated that they're using 'DAO pattern', which > sounds like they're *probably* not using Entity beans. *If* this is the > case, it may mean your arguments about multiple EJB calls don't apply. > Israel, are you using Entity EJBs or not? > > If the system is simple, then transactions may not be required; it may > be enough just to handle the commit / rollback on each JDBC call in the > DAO. It depends on the system requirements. > > <snip/> > > > It is my opinion that non-use of the Facade Pattern is the > > number one cause of performance problems in EJB systems. > > Again, it sounds like the original poster was debating whether to use > [session EJB -> DAO object] versus [POJO -> DAO object]; if so, then the > above isn't relevant. > > If the system is more complex & requires transaction support, then I > entirely agree with your approach. --- You are currently subscribed to jdjlist as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
