RE: EJB = bad = MS.net - worrisome flow of ignorant off-topic "a dvice" on this board

["Cakalic, James" <Ja...@heybridge.com>]

I'm not sure it is entirely off-topic, Alex. Many people are concerned, and
rightly so, about application of technologies and design patterns in the
development of systems which are also utilizing Struts. Sometimes the use of
a framework like Struts can result in confusion by less enlightened ones
than yourself about how to 'hook-up' the rest of the system. I've seen
several posts now by Ted Husted that talk about the proper allocation of
responsibilities to Action classes v. "business delegates" which interact
with the model. Meaningful advice about patterns and technologies can help
people who are searching for proven solutions. Unfortunately, the thread
went a bit astray even as it started because of the character of the
comments.

BTW, as for mapping "500 data tables to 500 entity beans" being an "idiotic
architecture", I went to an IBM WebSphere Commerce Suite course last month
and learned that the product has 300 tables, nearly all of which are mapped
by CMP entity beans. There are almost no session beans in the design. And
they don't use container managed transactions. Every unit of work started by
a web hit is wrapped in a JTA user transaction by the web app front
controller and the transaction includes the response generation. Not quite
the architecture I would have expected. Can't speak to any of the -ilities
of this design. But just goes to show, I think, that there are plenty of
ways to tackle the problem.

As for off-topic discussions, I would have expected you to flame the "Which
development environment" thread a little more vigorously than this one. But
maybe what is irrelevant, frivolous, ignorant, or off-topic is a matter of
personal opinion?

Jim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Esterkin, Alex [mailto:Alex.Esterkin@FMR.COM]
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:56 PM
> To: 'Struts Users Mailing List'
> Cc: general@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: RE: EJB = bad = MS.net - worrisome flow of ignorant off-topic
> "a dvice" on this board
> Importance: High
> 
> 
> I hope not many enterprise applications are built using this ignorant
> 'advice'.  IBM argued against EJBs up until recently because 
> of countless
> deficiencies in EJB container implementation in WebSphere 
> 3.5.*.  Since
> WebSphere 4.0 introduction, they have clearly warmed up to 
> using EJBs in
> their "best practices" white papers. 
> 
> As any other technology, EJBs can be abused. If one mapped a fully
> normalized DB schema consisting of 500 data tables to 500 
> entity beans, this
> would be an idiotic architecture. In any case, this has 
> nothing to do with
> MVC or Struts.
> 
> I suggest members of this list stick to the main topic of discussion -
> Struts.  Struts has nothing to do with EJBs.  In a properly designed
> application, EJBs, DAOs or any other persistence related components
> shouldn't be accessed directly from presentation elements and 
> components,
> such as JSP tags.  
> 
> Sticking closer to the topic of this list will allow to 
> reduce the flow of
> postings to more reasonable levels.
> 
> Best regards,
> ----------------
>    Alex Esterkin 
> =============================================================
> 	
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vic Cekvenich [mailto:vic@basebeans.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 12:42
> To: Struts Users Mailing List
> Cc: general@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: EJB = bad = MS.net
> 
> 
> Home page of Jakarta has this
> http://jakarta.apache.org/site/news.html#0130.2
> on this:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg03376.html
> 
> I agree. Doing EJBs is bad on many levels and creates more problems. 
> Avoid EJB if you want to stay in Java.
> 
> Alternative is to just use Struts + TomCat + RowSet (or DAO 
> if you are 
> doing something simple or small) and done. This is the sweet 
> spot. MVC 
> is all you need.
> 
> Alternative, do EJBs and your organization WILL switch to MS 
> .NET on the 
> next project, leave J2EE, and you have to learn VB.net.
> 
> EJBs are for newbies. (If you need middleware (very rare) use SOAP)
> 
> lol,
> Vic
> 
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

RE: EJB = bad = MS.net

[Thinh Doan <td...@twjconsulting.com>]

I vote to keep this discussion going on here since 1) I don't want to
subscribe to another mailing list, and 2) it's a "natural" progression for
me to follow the MVC (Struts) framework/mindset.  There are topics related
to Struts here that I can't afford to read them all, perhaps EJBs could be
one topic for those who are not interested in this subject.

About Ghoot's point that we need to pick the right technology for the right
application/requirements, I'd totally agree.  And I'm relying on this type
of discussions to help me make that initial decision, provided it's factual
and objective.  If everyone says technology XYZ should be avoided because
1)... 2)..., don't go there, why would I waste time considering or
evaluating it?

So many thanks to those who have contributed to this thread.

Thinh

-----Original Message-----
From: Cakalic, James [mailto:James.Cakalic@heybridge.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 1:51 PM
To: 'Struts Users Mailing List'
Subject: RE: EJB = bad = MS.net - worrisome flow of ignorant off-topic
"a dvice" on this board


I'm not sure it is entirely off-topic, Alex. Many people are concerned, and
rightly so, about application of technologies and design patterns in the
development of systems which are also utilizing Struts. Sometimes the use of
a framework like Struts can result in confusion by less enlightened ones
than yourself about how to 'hook-up' the rest of the system. I've seen
several posts now by Ted Husted that talk about the proper allocation of
responsibilities to Action classes v. "business delegates" which interact
with the model. Meaningful advice about patterns and technologies can help
people who are searching for proven solutions. Unfortunately, the thread
went a bit astray even as it started because of the character of the
comments.

BTW, as for mapping "500 data tables to 500 entity beans" being an "idiotic
architecture", I went to an IBM WebSphere Commerce Suite course last month
and learned that the product has 300 tables, nearly all of which are mapped
by CMP entity beans. There are almost no session beans in the design. And
they don't use container managed transactions. Every unit of work started by
a web hit is wrapped in a JTA user transaction by the web app front
controller and the transaction includes the response generation. Not quite
the architecture I would have expected. Can't speak to any of the -ilities
of this design. But just goes to show, I think, that there are plenty of
ways to tackle the problem.

As for off-topic discussions, I would have expected you to flame the "Which
development environment" thread a little more vigorously than this one. But
maybe what is irrelevant, frivolous, ignorant, or off-topic is a matter of
personal opinion?

Jim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Esterkin, Alex [mailto:Alex.Esterkin@FMR.COM]
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:56 PM
> To: 'Struts Users Mailing List'
> Cc: general@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: RE: EJB = bad = MS.net - worrisome flow of ignorant off-topic
> "a dvice" on this board
> Importance: High
>
>
> I hope not many enterprise applications are built using this ignorant
> 'advice'.  IBM argued against EJBs up until recently because
> of countless
> deficiencies in EJB container implementation in WebSphere
> 3.5.*.  Since
> WebSphere 4.0 introduction, they have clearly warmed up to
> using EJBs in
> their "best practices" white papers.
>
> As any other technology, EJBs can be abused. If one mapped a fully
> normalized DB schema consisting of 500 data tables to 500
> entity beans, this
> would be an idiotic architecture. In any case, this has
> nothing to do with
> MVC or Struts.
>
> I suggest members of this list stick to the main topic of discussion -
> Struts.  Struts has nothing to do with EJBs.  In a properly designed
> application, EJBs, DAOs or any other persistence related components
> shouldn't be accessed directly from presentation elements and
> components,
> such as JSP tags.
>
> Sticking closer to the topic of this list will allow to
> reduce the flow of
> postings to more reasonable levels.
>
> Best regards,
> ----------------
>    Alex Esterkin
> =============================================================
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vic Cekvenich [mailto:vic@basebeans.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 12:42
> To: Struts Users Mailing List
> Cc: general@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: EJB = bad = MS.net
>
>
> Home page of Jakarta has this
> http://jakarta.apache.org/site/news.html#0130.2
> on this:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg03376.html
>
> I agree. Doing EJBs is bad on many levels and creates more problems.
> Avoid EJB if you want to stay in Java.
>
> Alternative is to just use Struts + TomCat + RowSet (or DAO
> if you are
> doing something simple or small) and done. This is the sweet
> spot. MVC
> is all you need.
>
> Alternative, do EJBs and your organization WILL switch to MS
> .NET on the
> next project, leave J2EE, and you have to learn VB.net.
>
> EJBs are for newbies. (If you need middleware (very rare) use SOAP)
>
> lol,
> Vic
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>