oups! just read about the property-persistence-strategy "conversation" so the cache size would not be a problem. nice..
On 1/17/06, Ted Steen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hi! > > I think the generic data access objects on the hibernate page could be > usefull as they, among other things, support a generic way to specify > the id (not only long). > > One thing that I come to think about regarding the > session-per-conversation pattern is that there could be memory issues. > the session cache could grow (per session!), and that would not scale > very well. I`m quite new to hibernate and peristent layers in general > so I could be wrong here :) > > I haven`t seen the stuff Jesse has done, where can I find it? > > > > > > On 1/17/06, Schulte Marcus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > hi ted, > > thanks for the feedback! > > > > > Why do you not use Hivetranse for session/transaction management? > > > There has already been done alot of work on that. It is a clean > > > Hivemind contribution. Check it out! > > > http://hivetranse.sourceforge.net/ > > > > > That's a story which went a bit "unlucky". Last summer, I had a look at > > hivetranse, but it didn't support hivemind 1.1 yet which I already used, and > > I really didn't want to backport ;). Then, I'm quite fond of the > > session-per-conversation pattern which is still not supported by hivetranse. > > It seems to be scheduled for hivetranse 0.6, however. Lastly, I didn't have > > the time to dig into hivetranse deeply enough to add what I needed. > > > > > Also, as you are using Java 5.0, I think you should consider using the > > > following patterns for generic data access objects: > > > http://www.hibernate.org/328.html > > > > > That would mean a generic AbstractPersistenceService, ... yes, looks like it > > would make sense... > > > > > Another thing is the HibernateSqueezer on the wiki. I think it is > > > really a good thing, and easy to implement thanks to Hivemind. > > > http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-tapestry/HibernateTapestrySquee > > zer?highlight=%28hibernate%29 > > > > That's definitively on my list for the next release. I'd like to have > > session-per-request, no detached objects as the second supported pattern > > (besides session-per-conversation). As far as i can see, that'll need a > > Datasqueezer and a custom PropertyPersistenceStrategy I'll take the > > Wiki-thing as a starting point. Also, Jesse uses this approach while I do > > not (currently), so I hope I'll be able to take a lot from his code. > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > -- > /ted > -- /ted --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
