cayenne-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrus Adamchik <>
Subject Re: remote object persistence - client classes
Date Fri, 07 Jul 2006 13:49:55 GMT
BTW, I was trying to jumpstart this discussion on the dev list in the  
context of the related Summer of Code project:

We'll see if this generates wider interest.


On Jul 7, 2006, at 4:06 AM, Tomi NA wrote:

> On 7/5/06, Andrus Adamchik <> wrote:
>> The interesting part is "processMessage(ClientMessage)" - essentially
>> all communications (including queries and updates) are done using a
>> set of ClientMessages. The simplest message would be a QueryMessage
>> that holds a NamedQuery. This is probably the place to start.
>> To estimate the level of effort ... with my current knowledge of the
>> framework it would probably take me 2-5 hours to rewrite a very basic
>> context-less query client in Java . There may be language-specific
>> caveats of course. And a learning curve...
> I still have to try out the existing remote object persistence myself:
> the possibility might present itself fairly soon, though.
> When I get a better feel for the speed of the entire concept and it's
> flexibility, I'll be able to comment more.
> As far as development is concerned, it seems to be that the way to go
> about it would be to define a minimum feature set, isolate the
> existing Java classes which implement this functionality in the ROP
> client and rewrite it class by class in something else. The first
> "foreign" language to implement such functionality would best be
> selected by the preferences of the people writing the code.
> Implementations in other would probably be much more straightforward,
> as the developers could litteraly try to rewrite a fairly small
> collection of classes in another language. Just thinking out loud...
> t..n.a.

View raw message