RE: transaction management (RE: cvs commit: jakarta-turbine-torqu e NO TES)

[Fedor Karpelevitch <fe...@Barra.COM>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason van Zyl [mailto:jvanzyl@zenplex.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 9:22 AM
> To: Turbine Developers List
> Subject: Re: transaction management (RE: cvs commit:
> jakarta-turbine-torque NO TES)
> 
> 
> On 10/31/01 12:16 PM, "Eric Dobbs" <er...@dobbse.net> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > On Wednesday, October 31, 2001, at 08:44  AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> > 
> >> On 10/31/01 10:19 AM, "Fedor Karpelevitch"
> >> <fe...@Barra.COM>
> >> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> I understand Jason's point. However I believe we still need
> >>> save(DBConnection) (or replacement) type of methods.
> >> 
> >> Sure, it's required now because we haven't implemented a 
> replacement or
> >> redesigned it but the interface an OM object adheres to 
> should be as
> >> simple
> >> as possible. Do we really need more than save()/update()/delete()?
> > 
> > or even just save() and delete()
> 
> yes!

AND their transactional counterparts save(Tran) & delete(Tran) too.

I also still believe that although it is correct that developer should not
HAVE to know anything about DB he should still be ABLE to do db specific
things like multirow updates, selects with complex criteria etc... That is
what I like about Torque nopw and I'd like to keep it. I have a number of
ideas on how to make this work, but still need to write them all down and
share for discussion.

fedor.

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