Hi Jim, first, thanks _a lot_ for your quick and helpful answer which I appreciate a lot! It made me feel a little bit happier again after this painful day as there's a small light at the end of the tunnel, now ;) Especially as you mentioned some of the terms I've read over the day but could not class correctly so far...
So, that means basically I have to decide whether I need the EJB functionality or if a POJO-based approach is enough for my application *thinking* Perhaps someone else can answer the following questions then: Why should I use EJB's at all now that Hibernate does such a great job? Is there a situation where using EJBs _and_ Hibernate makes sense and if yes, how can they be brought together? Are there performance issues using a POJO-based approach and perhaps EJBs should by all means be used in bigger applications or shouldn't that be a problem? What are your experiences? What about the idea to use one single session bean providing all methods needed to handle the POJOs and hibernate? Jim, you mentioned Spring and I'm wondering what Spring is good for? How does it "bridge" between Tapestry and Hibernate, how did it make your life easier? Which role plays Hivemind in this whole constellation? I'm not sure but perhaps Hivemind is just a replacement for Spring? Thanks again! Andreas On 17. Feb 2006 - 19:19:50, Jim Steinberger wrote: | Hi Andreas, | | Hibernate is an alternative to EJB CMP, though I'm sure you could use | the two solutions together if you had/wanted to. Both are a way of | bridging your Java classes and your database tables by mapping them -- | the goal is to not have to write SQL manually ... or rather, the goal is | to not to even have to think about the database as anything besides a | place where your Java objects go to ... hibernate :) | | | EJB2 CMP was very intrusive, from what I've heard, requiring you to | extend certain classes and/or implement various interfaces, ensuring | that your basic domain-model classes would only be relevant inside an | EJB container. Hibernate, on the other hand, lets you simplify your | domain-model back to plain-old-Java-objects (POJOS). Your objects are, | therefore, relevant anywhere, and you get the Object-Database bridge | without having to deal with the complexity of an EJB container. | | | I've never used EJB, let alone with Tapestry, so I can't really say much | about that. But I can say that if you were interested in creating an | application without EJB CM, I personally use Spring to bridge Hibernate | and Tapestry together and I'm enormously happy with how well my code is | organized/modularized as a result. | | Integrating Tapestry and Spring: | http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-tapestry/Tapestry4Spring | | Integrating Spring and Hibernate: | http://static.springframework.org/spring/docs/1.2.x/reference/orm.html#o | rm-hibernate | | Feel free to e-mail me directly if you'd like me to go further into | Tapestry-Spring-Hibernate; sorry I can't help with EJB questions. | | Jim --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
