> -----Original Message----- > From: Darren Shepherd [mailto:dar...@godaddy.com] > Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2012 8:25 AM > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Hibernate -> Custom DAO for AWS component > > All, > > I was just reviewing https://reviews.apache.org/r/6557/diff/ for the > Hibernate -> Custom DAO implementation and it makes me so sad. Its not > that you went from Hibernate ORM to custom built ORM (that is already in > CloudStack), you went from ORM to raw SQL. From the size of the diff and > the amount of lines of code added, its an advertisement in itself in why one > would want to use an ORM. > > I just joined this mail listing so I probably missed the whole back story, but > from what I can gather, you can't use hibernate because of the license and > the consensus is to just make it consistent with CloudStack, which already > has a custom ORM/DAO implementation. > > This comment is probably too late in the game, but I really think your missing > an opportunity here. For the future of CloudStack I think most everyone > would agree that it should move to a standard ORM approach and drop the > custom one it has. Using my "Jump to Conclusions Mat" I would say that such > a discussion will end up with deciding that Spring+JPA should be the > interface/container and the implementation I don't know (I'd vote Eclipse > TopLink if the license is compatible). > > So the AWS component is a perfect place to test out such framework do to > its isolated nature. Having a lot of experience with hibernate/jpa and > CloudStack I have a good idea in my mind just how difficult it would be to > convert all of the CloudStack code to a JPA compatible solution. If you were > to do the conversion, for practical reasons, you are going to have to do a > phased migration. This means that you'd have to support old framework and > new framework concurrently for sometime. Coming up with an approach to > reconcile the two frameworks will take some time and effort. Since the EC2 > component is a pretty well isolated framework, it would be easy to > implement Spring/JPA and test the validity of what would be the end state > before you take on the complex and long task of converting all of CloudStack. > > I'd even be willing to work on this. It just seems silly to me to go from ORM > to SQL and then back to ORM. But I realize, as I said before, this comment is > somewhat late in the game.
+1. We should not have gone back to using SQL on this. I added this email to the review for 6557. --Alex
