Zhang,
It depends on what you want.
Using session facade gives your architecture forward compatibility towards
EJB technologies and maybe new technologies that might come in ...
the overhead of using this pattern isn´t that important and you will have a
clearer separation of areas...
Regards,
Luc
;plug-in" interface implementations.
http://www.springframework.org/
robert
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 3:42 PM
> To: Struts Users Mailing List
> Subject: RE: Session facade
>
>
>
ist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject:RE: Session facade
Classification:
I would assert you don't need the Session Facade as one of the advantages
of the Session Facade is it's ability to abstract the low level operations
of the Session EJBs from upper lay
It will make sense. You'd let the j2ee container take
care of managing dao manager instances and you'll get
transaction support (if you need it). Plus, if you
decide to move your persistence layer to another
server it will be nicely packaged within the .ear that
contains your ejb session facade.
B
I would assert you don't need the Session Facade as one of the advantages of the
Session Facade is it's ability to abstract the low level operations of the Session
EJBs from upper layers of your architecture. You could probably have your actions
talking to a Business Delegate layer or your DAO
Maybe.
"Zhang, Larry \(L.\)"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
07/07/2004 02:58 PM
Please respond to
"Struts Users Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To
"Struts Users Mailing
List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc
Subject
Session facade
It seems session facade design pattern is becoming ubiqu
6 matches
Mail list logo
