Re: Java ORM newbie Question

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Us) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...

> What are the other cons of letting the DB manage this as opposed to
> using an ORM? Can the DB provide all the features of the ORM in and of
> itself? (We are using DB2 UDB for the IBM iSeries. V5R2)

at the end of the day, the database WILL manage transactions if you
need
to write something. 

Yet there is one point to take care of
* if you want to have so called optimistic transactions at the 
  OO code level, you better have an access layer
* if you need pessimistic transactions only - let the database do it 
  but I've never seen a serious business application that used
pessimistic
  locking - read a customer for update - the teller goes have a coffee
and
  the databases has that one customer locked all the time while your
user has
  a Cappucino at StarBucks :-)

Not using an access layer and writing it oneself is only useful and
better
for very small and simple projects. If you need some arguments, why it
is
better to use some kind of ORM have a look at
http://www.objectarchitects.de/ObjectArchitects/events/JAOO2003/Keller_PersistenceOptions.pdf

Cheers


Wolfgang