geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dain Sundstrom <>
Subject Re: [persistence] Some thoughts regarding CMP and JDO
Date Fri, 08 Aug 2003 04:00:47 GMT
On Thursday, August 7, 2003, at 10:20 PM, jcd wrote:

> Aren't we, in some respects, getting a bit overzealous about the 
> Persistence Tier?  Let's focus on getting the EJB life-cycle 
> management and transaction hierarchies dialed and designed.  Why not 
> gear efforts to the production of a solid BMP implementation with 
> Connection, Datasource, and Transaction management - get that dialed 
> and define a pluggable OPTIONALthird-party persistence interface.

Sorry, CMP is my area of expertise, so I tend to get very excited.

> What is the consensus out there regarding the use of BMP?  Is there 
> any desire to have the ability to 'unplug' any/all container 
> persistence services in exchange for a smaller footprint, lighter 
> weight implementation?

What do you mean here?  BMP is very simple to implement.  I expect to 
have a full implementation is a few weeks.

> Concentrating efforts on the basic EJB container services might well 
> prove to be a quicker track to a stable, performing implementation 
> that can be extended to accommodate the various persistence approaches 
> at a later time.  It is my feeling that this approach could postpone 
> much of the inevitable analysis paralysis that often accompanies 'The 
> Persistence Debate."  Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Geronimo is 
> beating his drums to early release victory.

The initial code includes pool, cache, locking, CMT, BMT, a stateless 
session container, and a bunch or other basic services.  We should be 
able to quickly have support stateless session bean, stateful session 
beans and bean managed entity beans.  What is missing are big things 
like a TransactionManager, deployment, JMS, and Webservices.


  * Dain Sundstrom
  * Partner
  * Core Developers Network

View raw message