commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From NetSQL <maill...@friendVU.com>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Commons Runtime API for Persistence
Date Sat, 02 Apr 2005 10:22:54 GMT

Great idea!

See if some of it can be based on Apache's iBatis SQL and DAO api.
If an API let me use iBatis SQL maps or Hibrenate, that would be great.

Also... with CoR... in esence you can just use:
execute(Map m)
for any DAO, Lucene, etc.

Just put in args in Map, when done put "RESULT" arraylist in Map, done.

.V

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> 
> a.k.a. "Commons Persisting"
> 
> Motivation
> ----------
> There are an increasing number of viable APIs for persisting objects to 
> data stores.  We currently have JDO, a JCP spec, Hibernate, a popular 
> open source project, OJB, an Apache open source project, EJB3, a new JCP 
> spec for object persistence,  commercial products such as Toplink, and 
> many others such as Abra, BasicWebLib, Castor, Cayenne, DataBind, 
> DBVisual Architect, EnterpriseObjectsFrameworks, Expresso, FireStorm, 
> iBATIS, Infobjects, InterSystems Cache, JULP, Jaxor, JDX, Kodo, LiDO, 
> O/R Broker, Planet J's WOW, intelliBO, SimplOrm, Spadesoft XJDO, 
> Sql2Java, PE:J, VBSF and others.
> 
> Each of these solutions have strengths and weaknesses and are chosen by 
> developers based on specific project needs, political considerations, or 
> quality of golf outings provided by the technology salesperson.
> 
> Like the situation that developed a few years ago with logging, in which 
> developers were forced to choose between the de-facto standard, Apache 
> Log4J, or the JCP-defined spec, java.util.logging, we believe that we 
> have a similar situation today - developers are forced to commit to an 
> API or product for persisting objects which may limit usefulness to 
> users who may have a legacy persisting technology, or choose an 
> different technology than the software was developed for.  Further, 
> there is no way to insulate software from "API lock-in", to allow 
> software to be used with different persisting APIs as style, fads and 
> technology concerns dictate.  Finally, there is no way to ensure that 
> arbitrary dependencies that a project uses can, in an ad-hoc way, find 
> and write to the application's data store.  In the same way that 
> components using commons-logging never cease to delight and surprise 
> users, we think that commons persisting should just enhance the mystery 
> and intrigue of adding apparently innocuous dependencies to a project.
> 
> Proposal
> --------
> 
> Following the successful model of "Commons Logging", we propose to 
> create a single API, to be known as "Commons Persisting" which allows 
> isolation from the fashions and trends in persisting technology.
> 
> This API will not :
> 
> - define a query language similar to any other
> - define a query language conforming to standard set thEory
> - define an O/R mapping metadata syntax
> - define rules for object lifecycle with respect to the methods in this API
> - use <insert favorite unproven technology here>
> - constrain the types of objects and object models that a given plug-in 
> might support
> - keep Hani quiet
> 
> This API will :
> 
> - allow users to use one set of simple interfaces for persisting objects
> - allow different providers to be "plugged-in"
> - define an API for execution of queries
> - piss off various and sundry expert group members
> 
> Comments?
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message