Serge
You spoke quite recently about wanting to replace the Town DB interface
with some custom written jdbc to improve performance. Do you have any more
info about progress on this? Would an alternative be to work on the Town
code to try and improve it's performance - since it has some great
feat
n" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 5:44 AM
Subject: Town replacement
> Serge
>
> You spoke quite recently about wanting to replace the Town DB interface
> with some custom written jdbc to improve performance. Do you have
t don't
> have any time these days.
>
> Serge Knystautas
> Loki Technologies
> http://www.lokitech.com/
> - Original Message -
> From: "Steve Crossan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 5:44 AM
> Subjec
At 02:31 8/5/01 +0100, Charles Benett wrote:
>3) Avalon (jakarta)
> Pros: provides pooled connections,
J2EE style - easy to pester main developer ;)
> Cons: don't know much about this, possibly limited community at
>present (Avalon & cocoon)
Doesn't do any management or cross vendor SQL ma
rs (since there seem to be variations that might cause incompatibility,
> > or require us to hardcode so support).
> >
> > Sorry, I'd like to say I have something to report, but again, I just don't
> > have any time these days.
> >
> > Serge Kn
Steve Crossan wrote:
>
> > I can think of four alternatives for db support in james: town, jdbc,
> > avalon, turbine.
> >
> > 1) Stick with town.
> >Pros: (per serge) Abstraction across multiple drivers, simpler than
> > JDBC, connection pooling
> >Cons: (serge) forces message instantia
- Original Message -
From: "Steve Crossan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> It would be
> great to have a good open source Object-Relational mapping solution and
> Town seems to be a good start - I don't know how far the other projects go
> down that route.
FYI: 2 other open source ORM projects tha
on 5/8/01 11:17 AM, "Harmeet Bedi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FYI: 2 other open source ORM projects that could be interesting are
> DODS from Enhydra http://dods.enhydra.org/
> Castor from Exolab http://castor.exolab.org/
>
> Harmeet
DODS, I don't know much about, but on the Enhydra.org site,
Seems like Peer/Turbine is worth investigating. I'm happy to do a bit of
research into this - try and port the James/Town stuff to James/Peer.
Steve
http://www.runtime-collective.com
t: 01273 234290
f: 01273 234291
m: 0789 984 1684
On Tue, 8 May 2001, Jon Stevens wrote:
> on 5/8/01 11:17 AM, "
That would be great. If you send tested files/ patches to this list,
someone can add them to CVS.
You might want to start with MailRepository. We need to rethink
UserRepository to handle encrypted passwords, changing passwords,
forwarding and aliasing.
Charles
Steve Crossan wrote:
>
> Seems l
Peers are *the* right solution. I'm biased of course.
Torque itself is abstracted from Turbine. Torque is the tool that you use to
build the generated .sql and the .java files from a .xml file input. This is
what builds the OR mapping.
Those files do indeed depend on *parts* of Turbine (not all
11 matches
Mail list logo
