Re: choices regarding where to place code - in the database or middletier

From: Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 07:48:54 -0800
Message-ID: <1075477676.929037@yasure>

Noons wrote:

> "Daniel Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message
> news:1075442171.779310_at_yasure...
>
> Sorry folks, I'm reducing the number of x-posts otherwise my ISP will kill
> my replies: thank God ONE provider is taking an active stance against
> spam on Usenet, I say!
>
>
>

>>By selecting as your example: "A web-page that displays" you eliminated
>>anything having to do with sequences. What I was trying to get you to
>>deal with was issues related to insert, update, and delete. Issues that
>>involve sequences but also the transaction and locking models that are
>>totally different between commercial database products.
>>
>>So the response while impressive is unsatisfactory in that it didn't
>>address the issue. And the stuff about Project Marvel ... as marvelous
>>as it may be ... has nothing to do with the back-end database ...
>>HTML_DB is a front-end tool. Could I impose upon you to try again this
>>time addressing this issues around transaction processing.
>>

>
>
> I can see your point. But I think you are approaching it from the wrong
> angle.
> The whole argument about wrappers is precisely to hide an implementation
> from a design requirement.
>
> The concern is not if one database has a sequence and another has an auto
> sequence column.
>
> The (design) concern is: I want a surrogate key on EVERY relational row
> storing my object data and an ID for my persistent object instance data.
> Period.

I understand and agree. I've used wrappers many times myself.

But at some point you have got to step up to the plate and put that code into a package or use a sequence to generate that surrogate key.

And when you do everything from that point on down is vendor specific. It is not going to be implemented against any other vendor's product without a rewrite.

So does the wrapper allow you to implement a single front-end against multiple back-ends ... absolutely ... and your explanation was great. But you are still hand-coding at some point against a specific RDBMS.

So lets go back to the original discussion that started off between myself and Joe. Joe works for BEA and was advocating what I took to be a bit of schizophrenia ... dependence and independence.

If what you have written is what he meant the miscommunication has been reconciled. Thanks.

-- 
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

Received on Fri Jan 30 2004 - 09:48:54 CST