Re: Java ORM newbie Question

Thanks all. I need to trust my instinct more on these things.

Plus - lots of articles by knowledgeable people have confirmed my thoughts on this.


Jason 


"Bob Badour" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> "Wolfgang Keller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [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 :-)
> 
> Apparently, either you do not consider banking serious, or you do not
> understand transactions particularly well. Every ATM (and every teller's
> terminal) uses pessimistic locking in its transactions.
> 
> 
> > 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_Persi
> stenceOptions.pdf
> 
> Why do Germans seem so enamored with this crap? Am I imagining it? Or is
> there some cultural attraction?