|
From: Rod J. <rod...@in...> - 2003-04-16 13:11:42
|
Isabelle, You make a valid point about not wanting to need another product for just one problem. My view is that - we don't want to get into full-blown O/R mapping - BUT there is scope in building more JDBC-based functionality and abstractions on top of the Spring JDBC way of doing things. To my mind the central value proposition of Spring JDBC is the exception hierarchy and way it frees developers of the tedious and error-prone tasks of raw JDBC. Additional features can validly be layered on top. So I think you should propose how you think we should add the insert functionality, perhaps even implement it, so we can discuss it and incorporate it if we're all comfortable with it. I think it's - important that any abstraction shouldn't impose potential inefficiency, and should allow the use of efficient RDBMS functions like Oracle sequences - important that it should be compatible with JDBC 3.0 moving forward. Thomas, do you have any thoughts on this? Regards, Rod > Personally, I don't think I'd want to commit to yet another framework such as hibernate for ex. in the project at work we're planning to do with spring. Most of what we need for jdbc is in spring, except for the insert functionality. Even with oracle, I don't like the idea of having to write a stored procedure for every single insert, I'd probably opt for the additional cost of a select next_val from dual in jdbc code (i.e. instead of just doing an insert, first retrieve the key val then do the insert). The main problem is with db's that don't have sequences, and if we agree to live with holes in the primary key sequences we can implement an algorithm where some sort of key manager per VM reserves a range of key values per table. > > Isabelle |