qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alan Conway <acon...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: persistence
Date Fri, 08 Sep 2006 14:27:47 GMT
On Fri, 2006-09-08 at 09:56 -0400, Rajith Attapattu wrote:
> I agree with Rafeal, and we need to have a very simple persistant API.
> But then again O/R mappers are in style and end users may prefer things like
> hibernate, ibatis etc..
> And they maybe convinent to work with.

People will definitely want to change the DB backend, but I predict that
no Qpid user will ever care *how* we get the data into the database,
they will only care:
 - Can I use my favorite database X?
 - Is it fast?

I'm guessing JDBC is all the pluggability we need, so the only reason to
use an O/R mapper is if we think it's a productivity win for us and it
doesn't have significant performance impact. I don't think the Qpid
persistence schemas are going to be very complex so I'm not sure a O/R
mapper gives us much, but I don't know the Java ones well enough to
comment further.


'nuff said, back to C++ :)


Mime
View raw message