You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@struts.apache.org by "Zhang, Larry (L.)" <lz...@ford.com> on 2004/07/07 20:58:42 UTC
Session facade
It seems session facade design pattern is becoming ubiquitous. My question is that
if we are not going to use EJB(but we do have DAO-data access object), does it still make sense to use session facade?
Thanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Session facade
Posted by Lucas Gonzalez Pearson <lu...@convergia.com.ar>.
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,
Lucas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Zhang, Larry (L.)" <lz...@ford.com>
To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <us...@struts.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 3:58 PM
Subject: Session facade
It seems session facade design pattern is becoming ubiquitous. My question
is that
if we are not going to use EJB(but we do have DAO-data access object), does
it still make sense to use session facade?
Thanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
OT: Re: Session facade
Posted by DG...@EvergreenInvestments.com.
Maybe.
"Zhang, Larry \(L.\)" <lz...@ford.com>
07/07/2004 02:58 PM
Please respond to
"Struts Users Mailing List" <us...@struts.apache.org>
To
"Struts Users Mailing List" <us...@struts.apache.org>
cc
Subject
Session facade
It seems session facade design pattern is becoming ubiquitous. My
question is that
if we are not going to use EJB(but we do have DAO-data access object),
does it still make sense to use session facade?
Thanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
Re: Session facade
Posted by klute <so...@yahoo.com>.
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.
Best,
James
---
http://www.devbistro.com
--- "Zhang, Larry (L.)" <lz...@ford.com> wrote:
>
> It seems session facade design pattern is becoming
> ubiquitous. My question is that
> if we are not going to use EJB(but we do have
> DAO-data access object), does it still make sense to
> use session facade?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> user-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org