[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: JDO

Falko Braeutigam wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Per Nyfelt wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ozone-dev-owner@ozone-db.org
> > > [mailto:ozone-dev-owner@ozone-db.org]On Behalf Of Falko Braeutigam
> > > Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 5:06 PM
> > > To: ozone-dev@ozone-db.org
> > > Subject: RE: JDO
> > >
> > > The questions is: what is the goal of JDO. Will it become the Persistence
> > > manager for EJB (I was told it will not but I'm still not sure)
> > > or will it be
> > > an independent, more OO centric approach. If the later is true, then we
> > > definitely should try to support it.
> > >
> > Right this is an important point. To me it is also whether the support for
> > JDO means the Ozone app server quality will disappear and in the JDO view it
> > will only be a storage area with some query facilities. I'm a little
> > confused what the JDO spec is saying, it seems somewhat ambiguous to me.
> > I'll look into Connectors some more and see if I can figure out a way to
> > implement it unless you already have some ideas?
> 
> no. looking forward your insights ;)
> 
> Falko
> --
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Falko Braeutigam                              mailto:falko@smb-tec.com
> SMB GmbH                                        http://www.smb-tec.com

I read the JDO spec last week and was disappointed. Apparently it is
ONLY a data storage. The methods in your JDO classes doesn't matter at
all--only the fields you declare. What was said earlier about JDO not
really getting to the object centric view of things seems correct.
They're still stuck on supporting RDBMS and such, and so they can't
allow functionality that would require an object to be an object.

-joel shellman