db-ojb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brian McCallister <mccallis...@forthillcompany.com>
Subject Re: OJB usability - part 1 of 5: versioning policy
Date Wed, 15 Oct 2003 17:44:52 GMT
Chris,

Thank you for the feedback, it is very good and much appreciated!

Extracting from your message I hear the following suggestions 
(requirements from your point of view).

1) API freeze at RC stage (Part 1)
2) Better error reporting on configuration problems (Part 2)
3) There seems to be a large amount of redundant code (Part 4)
4) Caching implementation and use could be improved (Part 5)
5) Documentation needs to be improved (Part 5)

I very much agree with item 1, and will add that configuration file 
information needs to be locked during RC stages as well (FieldAccessor 
names changed when Armin refactored them, as was much needed)

I also agree with 2 - Armin has already committed to making that change.

I am of mixed thoughts on 3. There is some definite factoring that can 
happen (one thing I really want is EnhancedOQLQuery to be a Query, but 
I am hoping (and planning) on seeing that happen as the OTM matures and 
the ODMG impl gets moved onto the OTM). There does not seem to me to be 
a great deal of redundancy compared to other similarly sized projects I 
have worked on. As with any codebase, it can be made cleaner.

Four and five are related - the cache in OJB is more about object 
materialization than avoiding DB calls. If you need to avoid DB calls 
you need a heavier weight solution a la CMP EJB's. It is likely 
possible to improve caching some, but there are higher priority issues 
right now. The solution that it sounds like you want would be a caching 
implementation above the OJB level - application level caching of 
persistent objects. Documenting how it works, and what to expect are 
important. The documentation issue is known (heck, I was granted 
committer status because I kept making documentation patches) and I am 
personally working on that.

The biggest thing is a request to you, and anyone else using OJB, that 
when you run into problems like you have bring them up on the user/dev 
list. Most of the specific things you listed are genuine problems (the 
package organization is a matter of taste, imho, but I see where you 
are coming from  -- your solution would be more elegant in that it 
makes the security manager configuration much easier.

I am sorry that you have had a bad experience dealing with OJB, and am 
glad you brought the problems up. This is exactly the feedback we need 
to make OJB tool we want it to be.

-Brian



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


Mime
View raw message