You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@tapestry.apache.org by George Christman <gc...@cardaddy.com> on 2012/03/15 01:10:18 UTC
Tapestry-jpa 5.3 vs Tapestry-Hibernate
Hello everyone, I figured it's been a while since this topic has been brought
up, so I'd like to come back to it again. I've finally managed to find some
free time to play with my personal project "yay", which means I'll be doing
a full rewrite. I'd like to hear what Tapestry-JPA users have to say about
it in comparison to hibernate. For the past couple years, I've used
Tapestry-Hibernate which has been really nice to work with, however I was
recently turned on to Tapestry-JPA. I was told I wouldn't need to use value
encoders with Tapestry-JPA, something I need to do all the time with
Hibernate. This seemed pretty appealing, is there any other advantages I
should know about? Thanks Guys.
--
View this message in context: http://tapestry.1045711.n5.nabble.com/Tapestry-jpa-5-3-vs-Tapestry-Hibernate-tp5566580p5566580.html
Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry-jpa 5.3 vs Tapestry-Hibernate
Posted by Robert Zeigler <ro...@roxanemy.com>.
Not sure how tapestry-jpa handles un-persisted instances. That is certainly another area where tapestry-hibernate does not give you a useable ValueEncoder.
To clarify my last post: tapestry-hibernate will give you a functional default value encoder if:
1) The entity has a single column pk
2) The entity is persistent
Robert
On Mar 14, 2012, at 3/147:28 PM , George Christman wrote:
> Thanks Robert for your reply. Yes I was referring to custom value encoders,
> perhaps I'm misusing them. I seem to be writing custom value encoders for
> components like the AjaxAddRow which is nothing more than a single column
> pk. The reason I use them is to generate a temp id 's for the component to
> use. I was hoping to get away from writing custom value encoders for simple
> component implementations like the one stated above.
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://tapestry.1045711.n5.nabble.com/Tapestry-jpa-5-3-vs-Tapestry-Hibernate-tp5566580p5566606.html
> Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry-jpa 5.3 vs Tapestry-Hibernate
Posted by George Christman <gc...@cardaddy.com>.
Thanks Robert for your reply. Yes I was referring to custom value encoders,
perhaps I'm misusing them. I seem to be writing custom value encoders for
components like the AjaxAddRow which is nothing more than a single column
pk. The reason I use them is to generate a temp id 's for the component to
use. I was hoping to get away from writing custom value encoders for simple
component implementations like the one stated above.
--
View this message in context: http://tapestry.1045711.n5.nabble.com/Tapestry-jpa-5-3-vs-Tapestry-Hibernate-tp5566580p5566606.html
Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Tapestry-jpa 5.3 vs Tapestry-Hibernate
Posted by Robert Zeigler <ro...@roxanemy.com>.
Disclaimer: I haven't used tapestry-jpa. :)
But, Tapestry uses value encoders. tapestry-hibernate uses them, tapestry-jpa uses them.
Tapestry uses them. The only question is whether you need to write custom value encoders.
tapestry-hibernate will provide default encoders for entities with a single pk column.
tapestry-jpa can evidently handle multi-column pks.
So you'll write fewer custom value encoders with tapestry-jpa than you will/might otherwise with tapestry-hibernate.
Not sure about other advantages.
HTH,
Robert
On Mar 14, 2012, at 3/147:10 PM , George Christman wrote:
> Hello everyone, I figured it's been a while since this topic has been brought
> up, so I'd like to come back to it again. I've finally managed to find some
> free time to play with my personal project "yay", which means I'll be doing
> a full rewrite. I'd like to hear what Tapestry-JPA users have to say about
> it in comparison to hibernate. For the past couple years, I've used
> Tapestry-Hibernate which has been really nice to work with, however I was
> recently turned on to Tapestry-JPA. I was told I wouldn't need to use value
> encoders with Tapestry-JPA, something I need to do all the time with
> Hibernate. This seemed pretty appealing, is there any other advantages I
> should know about? Thanks Guys.
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://tapestry.1045711.n5.nabble.com/Tapestry-jpa-5-3-vs-Tapestry-Hibernate-tp5566580p5566580.html
> Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org