You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to derby-user@db.apache.org by Maggi Federico <fe...@gmail.com> on 2009/04/29 23:58:20 UTC
Good, thin, ORM layer
Hello List,
I love embedded stuff. I love SQLite and I love Derby even more.
However, I was wandering, is there any good, thin, ORM layer which is
entailed for small applications that use Derby?
I found ActiveObjects pretty neat and I like the "conventions rather
than configuration" philosophy. However, I think it's sometimes
unstable though really promising.
What would you suggest? Thanks in advance,
-- Federico (trying to follow http://five.sentenc.es)
Re: Good, thin, ORM layer
Posted by Chris Johnson <kn...@garlic.com>.
I've used BeanKeeper (http://netmind.hu/persistence/index.php) and found it
easy to work with.
Chris Johnson
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 5:58 PM, Maggi Federico
<fe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello List,
>
> I love embedded stuff. I love SQLite and I love Derby even more.
> However, I was wandering, is there any good, thin, ORM layer which is
> entailed for small applications that use Derby?
>
> I found ActiveObjects pretty neat and I like the "conventions rather than
> configuration" philosophy. However, I think it's sometimes unstable though
> really promising.
>
> What would you suggest? Thanks in advance,
-------------------------------------------------------------
Family photographs are a critical legacy for
ourselves and our descendants. Protect that
legacy with a digital backup and recovery plan.
Re: Good, thin, ORM layer
Posted by Donald McLean <dm...@gmail.com>.
I've become quite fond of Hibernate (hibernate.org) - though I'm
firmly convinced that most of their contributors are from some
strange, distant planet.
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 5:58 PM, Maggi Federico
<fe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello List,
>
> I love embedded stuff. I love SQLite and I love Derby even more.
> However, I was wandering, is there any good, thin, ORM layer which is
> entailed for small applications that use Derby?
>
> I found ActiveObjects pretty neat and I like the "conventions rather than
> configuration" philosophy. However, I think it's sometimes unstable though
> really promising.
>
> What would you suggest? Thanks in advance,
-------------------------------------------------------------
Family photographs are a critical legacy for
ourselves and our descendants. Protect that
legacy with a digital backup and recovery plan.
Re: Good, thin, ORM layer
Posted by Francois Orsini <fr...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
You can have a look at this distributed Java ORM client framework (
holchoko.org) that is making use of JPA + Derby:
http://www.codespot.net/sessions/jazoon/2008.html
You might find this interesting and it might suit your needs although it
will very likely not satisfy your requirement in terms of being thin. I have
personally used JPA on the client side for some rapid prototyping and as a
proof of concept.
In any case and FYI,
--francois
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Maggi Federico <fe...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hello List,
>
> I love embedded stuff. I love SQLite and I love Derby even more.
> However, I was wandering, is there any good, thin, ORM layer which is
> entailed for small applications that use Derby?
>
> I found ActiveObjects pretty neat and I like the "conventions rather than
> configuration" philosophy. However, I think it's sometimes unstable though
> really promising.
>
> What would you suggest? Thanks in advance,
>
> -- Federico (trying to follow http://five.sentenc.es)
>
>