Re: AW: [Objectbridge-jdo-dev] jdo extension

[Andy L. <aj...@as...>]

The key point about the JDO file is that it is specified by the standard.
If they didn't specify it, that would be different....

> Hi Christian,
>
> Christian Sell wrote:
>
> <snip>
>>
>> I disagree. A database is a resource that must not be taken
>> lightly, as it has the strongest performance implications if
>> treated wrongly. Luring people into the illusion that they
>> can do away with it by the push of a button has the potential
>> of generating disappointments.
>> IMO, a good O/R framework must either exploit or allow easy
>> access to the full capabilities of the underlying DBMS. And
>> in a corporate production scenario, you will almost always
>> have to map your objects to a pre-existing schema.
>>
>
>
> I absolutely agree with you!
>
> That's why I was so sceptic about the *.JDO idea.
>
> That's why I said: the OJB DescriptorRepository must be the guide line!
> But if we can have all necessary information in a *.jdo file I see no
> problems in generating the DescriptorRepository from it.
>
> cheers,
>
>
> Thomas
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________
>
> Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
> August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm
>
> _______________________________________________
> Objectbridge-jdo-dev mailing list
> Obj...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/objectbridge-jdo-dev


"The heights of genius are only measurable by the depths of stupidity."