continuum-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rahul Thakur <rahul.thakur.x...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: ContinuumStore refactoring
Date Mon, 05 May 2008 23:04:45 GMT
Thanks Emmanuel,

I will take a look this weekend (still trying to get system back to life 
after recent crash) .

Cheers,
Rahul


Emmanuel Venisse wrote:
> ok, the base is done. You can look at it.
>
> Team, can you look at my JPA branch and at the Rahul's one too and let us
> know what you think about them and which method you'd want to use in
> Continuum.
>
> Thanks
> Emmanuel
>
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 6:19 AM, Emmanuel Venisse<
> emmanuel.venisse@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>> The sample is ready, I'll try to clean the code in the train and commit it
>> tonight.
>> I wanted to use Spring annotations for auto-configuration instead of the
>> sping conf file, but it isn't important and out of topic for the sample.
>>
>> Emmanuel
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 5:57 AM, Rahul Thakur<rahul.thakur.xdev@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Emmanuel,
>>>
>>> Just wondering if you hacked some samples? :-)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Rahul
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Emmanuel Venisse wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'll create some examples asap.
>>>>
>>>> Emmanuel
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 4:07 AM, Rahul Thakur<
>>>> rahul.thakur.xdev@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   Hi,
>>>>> Some code using a couple of Entities as examples would be nice :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> I still think the API would be verbose.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Rahul
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 11:06 PM, Emmanuel Venisse
>>>>> <emmanuel.venisse@gmail.com>   wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 10:45 AM, Rahul Thakur<
>>>>>>
>>>>> rahul.thakur.xdev@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   2)   Criteria vs Named Queries: I am not convinced (yet) that
>>>>>>>>> Named
>>>>>>>>> queries are the way to go. I did some digging around,
they
>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> indeed
>>>>>>   best practices for JPA but I think the decision merits other
>>>>>>>>> consideration(s). I still believe the Criteria Queries
will
>>>>>>>>> help us
>>>>>>>>> define a cleaner Store interface.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm always in favor of named queries.
>>>>>>>> An other point about them that I haven't explain in previous
>>>>>>>> threads
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (I
>>>>>> think) is that with named queries, it is possible to modify
>>>>>>>> queries
>>>>>>>> externally with xml files so if with a DB we have some
>>>>>>>> performance
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> issues,
>>>>>>> it will be possible to override queries by a modified JPQL query
>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>> native
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> query.
>>>>>>>>   How do you see the refactored ContinuumStore interface
using
>>>>>>> Named
>>>>>>> Queries? I suspect it will be just as verbose again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't want to see a new time a big class for the store part. it
>>>>>> must
>>>>>>
>>>>> be
>>>>>
>>>>>> splitted in few domains.
>>>>>> All named queries related to Project would be defined in the
>>>>>> Project
>>>>>>
>>>>> class,
>>>>>
>>>>>> all named queries related to ProjectGroup would be defined in the
>>>>>> ProjectGroup class...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And we can add some more classes for particular results that
>>>>>> aren't
>>>>>>
>>>>> entities
>>>>>
>>>>>> objects (we won't have a lot)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With this, all concerns are separated and linked to a specific
>>>>>> entity.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Easy
>>>>>
>>>>>> to code, easy to read, easy to understand. It's my opinion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Sorry, still not convinced ;-)
>>>>>> I hope you are now ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Emmanuel
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rahul
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>

Mime
View raw message