Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of chris.custine@gmail.com
 designates 64.233.162.238 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth;
        b=s2oV1HdSC7dQdwNu4Q7/R7/vRYFV0TiPLnwzRx3YUeKE8uJpiyp+gL8lgOm6xfXaCwE5j8tMJwV3j0KA18P5TrLqUxwy8NlmTb/q9RD5fVq2WMDyhwojgJzf3fs/rZMsAr3t0864ziE4AOIm+xHcyvjnJ9Wjh2wATmCz/6aK87Q=
Message-ID: <43b026c70801160839x57448b3aoe351461622b1464b@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:39:50 -0700
From: "Chris Custine" <ccustine@apache.org>
Sender: chris.custine@gmail.com
To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [ApacheDS] Partition design and interfaces
In-Reply-To: <a32f6b020801151445m6e4f267eu5cf436b624661fba@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_13688_19630181.1200501590829"
References: <a32f6b020801151445m6e4f267eu5cf436b624661fba@mail.gmail.com>

------=_Part_13688_19630181.1200501590829
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

I really like the idea of an exception hierarchy specific to partitions (the
root cause from the underlying data store would always be made available
anyway).  Like Ersin mentions, Spring does something similar with their DAO
abstraction on top of Hibernate, JDBC, etc. and I think it works really
well, but I do think checked exceptions are more pertinent in our use case.

I support option 3.

Chris

On Jan 15, 2008 3:45 PM, Alex Karasulu <akarasulu@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Different underlying stores have different kinds of checked exceptions
> they throw at the lowest level.  For example JDBM is humble and just uses IO
> exceptions.  The JE authors use an exception hierarchy based on
> DatabaseException.  I was wondering if there was a preference out the base
> class for what exceptions are thrown from partitions?  Right now there are a
> few options:
>
> (1) Throw exceptions that extend IOException (works well with JDBM)
> (2) Throw NamingExceptions works well with Java Naming but we have a bad
> taste in our mouths from this.
> (3) Create our own base class for exceptions thrown at these lower layers
> like say PartitionException
>
> Right now I went with IOException but I'm thinking it might be biased
> towards a particular partition implementation.  Does anyone have some
> opinion one way or the other?
>
> Alex
>
>
>
>

------=_Part_13688_19630181.1200501590829
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

I really like the idea of an exception hierarchy specific to partitions (the root cause from the underlying data store would always be made available anyway).&nbsp; Like Ersin mentions, Spring does something similar with their DAO abstraction on top of Hibernate, JDBC, etc. and I think it works really well, but I do think checked exceptions are more pertinent in our use case.
<br><br>I support option 3.<br><br>Chris<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Jan 15, 2008 3:45 PM, Alex Karasulu &lt;<a href="mailto:akarasulu@apache.org">akarasulu@apache.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Hi all,<br><br>Different underlying stores have different kinds of checked exceptions they throw at the lowest level.&nbsp; For example JDBM is humble and just uses IO exceptions.&nbsp; The JE authors use an exception hierarchy based on DatabaseException.&nbsp; I was wondering if there was a preference out the base class for what exceptions are thrown from partitions?&nbsp; Right now there are a few options:
<br><br>(1) Throw exceptions that extend IOException (works well with JDBM)<br>(2) Throw NamingExceptions works well with Java Naming but we have a bad taste in our mouths from this.<br>(3) Create our own base class for exceptions thrown at these lower layers like say PartitionException
<br><br>Right now I went with IOException but I&#39;m thinking it might be biased towards a particular partition implementation.&nbsp; Does anyone have some opinion one way or the other?<br><font color="#888888"><br>Alex<br><br>
&nbsp;<br><br>
</font></blockquote></div><br>

------=_Part_13688_19630181.1200501590829--