On 5/18/05, Andrus Adamchik <andru..bjectstyle.org> wrote:
>
> On May 17, 2005, at 9:33 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> >> What about the ability to support other server side logic (say some
> >> ejb's, SOA based components or just some "sensitive" stuff that
> >> should NEVER be passed to client to look after)?
> >
> > We are not in business of replacing web services, RMI and such,
> > however I am planning to add support for executing server-side
> > business methods from the client "peer" objects.
>
> Derek,
>
> Do you have something specific in mind here?
>
> Theoretically you can feed data from any type of data services to
> Cayenne client. But if such data service has no predefined query
> language and update mechanism, using Cayenne would probably buy you
> nothing compared to say web service stubs compiled from WSDL. Or am I
> wrong?
>
Ahhh - specifics :-)
OK. We have a couple of web based apps (one WebObjects and one
WebSphere). The users are complaining about standard html as an
interface - "rich GUIs" are becoming a requirement (they are also
complaining about the WO scalability/performance in some cases). So,
enter in Eclipse RCP - looks great. Now, we want to use an ORM for our
data layer, and make sure that clients DONT have direct connections to
the database (enter in Cayenne 3T). We also have cases where we want
some of our complex logix to sit on the servers and be called from the
clients. One reason is data set size - we dont want large sets of data
transported down to the client if we can get a nice big fat server to
process it (pass some data in from the client, and the resulting
action requires significant resources to complete). At the moment this
could be logic sitting inside a webserver session, a call through to
an EJB (would use the EJB thread to pass in datacontext?) or possibly
a webservice. I know we could call these directly from the client, but
I would prefer to use the datacontext that already exists on the
server side in thos cases where I can.
Make sense?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue May 17 2005 - 22:01:28 EDT