ORM or JDBC?

Discussion in 'Java' started by carmelo, Mar 23, 2011.

  1. carmelo

    carmelo Guest

    Hi everybody,
    I would like your opinion regarding the use of ORM in web applications
    built with GWT. I'm a little reconsider about the ORM, and I wonder
    whether it is worth to use in web applications built with GWT. What
    would be real advantages in addition to greater independence and
    portability?

    Waiting for your comments :)
    carmelo, Mar 23, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. carmelo wrote:

    > Hi everybody,
    > I would like your opinion regarding the use of ORM in web applications
    > built with GWT. I'm a little reconsider about the ORM, and I wonder
    > whether it is worth to use in web applications built with GWT.


    It depends on many things but IMHO the most important is "Do you have a rich
    domain object model?" (and by "rich" I mean you have a lot of important
    processing in your OO code - not just getters and setters).
    If your app is only a way to manipulate (add/update/delete) data in a
    database then I would strongly suggest _not_ using any ORM. It would only
    add a lot of Java and/or XML/whatever code without any real benefit.

    Sure - you will need a framework of some kind. But IMO it shoud be a generic
    RDBMS oriented data transfer and maybe GUI/data binding one. (Similar to
    SmartGWT for example).

    > What
    > would be real advantages in addition to greater independence and
    > portability?


    Why do you think ORM gives you greater independence (from what?) and
    portability? Are you going to port your app to a non-relational DBMS?

    --
    Michal
    Michal Kleczek, Mar 23, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. carmelo

    Lew Guest

    Michal Kleczek wrote:
    > carmelo wrote:
    >> I would like your opinion regarding the use of ORM in web applications
    >> built with GWT. I'm a little reconsider about the ORM, and I wonder
    >> whether it is worth to use in web applications built with GWT.


    GWT is a graphical user interface library, right? What possible influence on
    the choice of persistence architecture could that have?

    Or am I wrong about GWT?

    > It depends on many things but IMHO the most important is "Do you have a rich
    > domain object model?" (and by "rich" I mean you have a lot of important
    > processing in your OO code - not just getters and setters).


    If not, go back and develop one before proceeding.

    Now we can proceed in the certainty that you do have one.

    > If your app is only a way to manipulate (add/update/delete) data in a
    > database then I would strongly suggest _not_ using any ORM. It would only
    > add a lot of Java and/or XML/whatever code without any real benefit.


    "A lot"? No.

    Certainly no more than the JDBC code you'll need instead.

    And "without any real benefit"? Where do you get this stuff?

    The real benefit, even for small projects, is the clean and manageable
    conversion between data and object models, and a natural mapping of
    relationships to collections.

    > ...


    >> What would be real advantages in addition to greater independence and
    >> portability?


    Those aren't even advantages of an ORM.

    > Why do you think ORM gives you greater independence (from what?) and
    > portability? Are you going to port your app to a non-relational DBMS?


    Portability is an overrated aspect of ORMs, but "relational DBMS" is no
    guarantee of portability. When even the Oracle RDBMS deviates from the SQL
    standard, and don't even get me started on MySQL, you can bet "relational"
    won't help. But so what? How often have you had to change database systems
    in a project?

    The advantage of an ORM is to present a persistent object model to an
    application and to relieve the application of boilerplate datastore-access
    code. It doesn't do quite as well for bulk, or set-oriented operations, which
    after all are the stock in trade of the relational model. In practice you'll
    need mostly ORM code (that is, regular object code) and some "raw" JDBC,
    depending on the mix of operations in your process.

    I don't have any idea what "Michal" means by a "rich domain object model" that
    could be something you wouldn't have regardless, so that's a red herring. You
    need an object model. Period. It needs to be as "rich" as the domain you're
    modeling. So take that comment as advice to have such a model, not as a
    decider on the ORM question.

    If you do use an ORM, use JPA (Java Persistence API)! Don't make the mistake
    of using older specifications (e.g., "classic" Hibernate). The Oracle Java EE
    tutorial has good information on how to do that. You can use Hibernate (in
    its JPA mode!), EclipseLink (the /de facto/ reference implementation) or
    Apache OpenJPA.

    The problem with ORMs is that people use them as mere data-access libraries.
    BRAAHHHHH! Wrong.

    Use them to maintain an object model, not a data model. There are subtleties
    to things like EntityManager lifetime and scope that flow naturally from an
    object orientation, but will completely screw up your application (as I've
    seen on multi-million-dollar projects) if you think of an ORM as a sort of
    expanded JDBC.

    A few measly hours of study should keep you out of the worst trouble.

    --
    Lew
    Honi soit qui mal y pense.
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Friz.jpg
    Lew, Mar 23, 2011
    #3
  4. Lew <> wrote:
    >> carmelo wrote:
    >>> I would like your opinion regarding the use of ORM in web applications
    >>> built with GWT. ...

    > GWT is a graphical user interface library, right?
    > Or am I wrong about GWT? [...]


    http://lmgtfy.com/?q=GWT

    ;-)
    Andreas Leitgeb, Mar 23, 2011
    #4
  5. carmelo

    Lew Guest

    Andreas Leitgeb wrote:
    > Lew wrote:
    >>> carmelo wrote:
    >>>> I would like your opinion regarding the use of ORM in web applications
    >>>> built with GWT. ...

    >> GWT is a graphical user interface library, right?
    >> Or am I wrong about GWT? [...]

    >
    > http://lmgtfy.com/?q=GWT
    >
    > ;-)


    Good one!

    It was a rhetorical question, though.

    --
    Lew
    Honi soit qui mal y pense.
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Friz.jpg
    Lew, Mar 23, 2011
    #5
  6. carmelo

    Arne Vajhøj Guest

    On 23-03-2011 04:45, carmelo wrote:
    > I would like your opinion regarding the use of ORM in web applications
    > built with GWT. I'm a little reconsider about the ORM, and I wonder
    > whether it is worth to use in web applications built with GWT. What
    > would be real advantages in addition to greater independence and
    > portability?


    The choice of framework for presentation layer should
    not affect the choice of framework for data access layer.

    If:
    - your usage of data is typical CRUD of single objects
    - your app is well above hello world complexity
    then ORM is probably a good choice.

    Arne
    Arne Vajhøj, Mar 24, 2011
    #6
  7. carmelo

    Arne Vajhøj Guest

    On 23-03-2011 07:26, Michal Kleczek wrote:
    > It depends on many things but IMHO the most important is "Do you have a rich
    > domain object model?" (and by "rich" I mean you have a lot of important
    > processing in your OO code - not just getters and setters).


    What??

    Most ORM data classes are pure data classes.

    > If your app is only a way to manipulate (add/update/delete) data in a
    > database then I would strongly suggest _not_ using any ORM. It would only
    > add a lot of Java and/or XML/whatever code without any real benefit.


    What??

    Together with queries then these are the areas where ORM are good.

    >> What
    >> would be real advantages in addition to greater independence and
    >> portability?

    >
    > Why do you think ORM gives you greater independence (from what?) and
    > portability?


    Most ORM's handle the database specific stuff without the developer
    needing to know.

    Arne
    Arne Vajhøj, Mar 24, 2011
    #7
  8. On 23-03-2011 09:57, Lew wrote:
    > Michal Kleczek wrote:
    >> It depends on many things but IMHO the most important is "Do you have
    >> a rich
    >> domain object model?" (and by "rich" I mean you have a lot of important
    >> processing in your OO code - not just getters and setters).

    >
    > If not, go back and develop one before proceeding.


    That depends on whether the problem to be solved would
    benefit from such.

    >>> What would be real advantages in addition to greater independence and
    >>> portability?

    >
    > Those aren't even advantages of an ORM.


    It is certainly possible to write an ORM that does not
    provide database independence, but all the major ones
    for Java do provide it.

    >> Why do you think ORM gives you greater independence (from what?) and
    >> portability? Are you going to port your app to a non-relational DBMS?

    >
    > Portability is an overrated aspect of ORMs, but "relational DBMS" is no
    > guarantee of portability. When even the Oracle RDBMS deviates from the
    > SQL standard, and don't even get me started on MySQL, you can bet
    > "relational" won't help. But so what? How often have you had to change
    > database systems in a project?


    It happens.

    And it can be bloody expensive.

    > I don't have any idea what "Michal" means by a "rich domain object
    > model"


    "rich" and "anemic" domain models are standard concepts - that
    is either invented or at least propagated by Fowler.

    > that could be something you wouldn't have regardless, so that's a
    > red herring. You need an object model. Period.


    That period should be a continuation mark.

    The world is a bit more complex than that.

    Fowler discusses it a bit in PEAA "Domain Model" "When to Use It".

    There are also the frequent case of a non object centric
    usage - think statistics and aggregation.

    Arne
    Arne Vajhøj, Mar 24, 2011
    #8
  9. On 11-03-23 05:45 AM, carmelo wrote:
    > Hi everybody,
    > I would like your opinion regarding the use of ORM in web applications
    > built with GWT. I'm a little reconsider about the ORM, and I wonder
    > whether it is worth to use in web applications built with GWT. What
    > would be real advantages in addition to greater independence and
    > portability?
    >
    > Waiting for your comments :)


    For me this is a surprisingly difficult recommendation to make. For most
    of the decade I've been using primarily ORMs - either Hibernate or
    Toplink with native APIs, or for the past 3-4 years Hibernate or Toplink
    Essentials/EclipseLink with JPA. Before that, in the Java/J2EE world, it
    was JDBC. I've also used iBatis/MyBatis, and raw JDBC even recently.

    After the past 3-4 years of using ORMs with JPA, mostly JPA 1.0 but some
    JPA 2.0, on applications of moderate load (100-300 concurrent users) and
    moderate complexity (200-300 entity classes), I've come to the following
    conclusions:

    1. For small applications it doesn't matter what you use: JDBC, a
    non-JPA mapper like MyBatis, or a full-fledged ORM with JPA like
    Hibernate or EclipseLink. All of them will work, with about the same
    amount of effort, and none will be more problematic than any other;

    2. For larger applications I can't in all good conscience recommend
    full-fledged ORMs with JPA anymore unless it's:

    a. in that subset (whether it's 10 percent, or 25 percent, or whatever)
    of large applications that have persistent objects and usage patterns
    that are well-served by JPA (*);

    b. you have a team of persistence layer developers who have substantial,
    hard-earned experience with all of - the target database, JDBC, the
    target application server, and the specific chosen ORM. There are dozens
    of ways to get bit with JPA ORMs, and sooner or later every one of them
    will get you. You'll see exceptions and encounter problems that you will
    never have with JDBC.

    So I'm not discounting JPA ORMs completely - I simply don't think they
    are an automatic first choice. Unfortunately you (or someone on your
    team) needs to have significant experience with a large JPA project
    before you know whether it's a reasonable choice. It's not possible -
    IMHO - to make a general recommendation that favours JPA.

    AHS

    * this sounds like a circular objection, but it makes more sense once
    you've gone through the agony of using JPA on a large project that
    really doesn't benefit from it...or is actively hindered by using it.

    --
    That's not the recollection that I recall...All this information is
    certainly in the hands of the auditor and we certainly await his report
    to indicate what he deems has occurred.
    -- Halifax, Nova Scotia mayor Peter Kelly, who is currently deeply in
    the shit
    Arved Sandstrom, Mar 24, 2011
    #9
  10. Is JDBC worth using? I thought it was just a Java layer on top of ODBC.
    Which nobody in their right mind uses.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Mar 24, 2011
    #10
  11. Arne Vajhøj wrote:

    > On 23-03-2011 07:26, Michal Kleczek wrote:
    >> It depends on many things but IMHO the most important is "Do you have a
    >> rich domain object model?" (and by "rich" I mean you have a lot of
    >> important processing in your OO code - not just getters and setters).

    >
    > What??
    >
    > Most ORM data classes are pure data classes.
    >


    Exactly my point - if that is the case then maintainig those classes and ORM
    mapping code just adds cost without giving any benefits.
    Been there done that, no thanks.

    >> If your app is only a way to manipulate (add/update/delete) data in a
    >> database then I would strongly suggest _not_ using any ORM. It would only
    >> add a lot of Java and/or XML/whatever code without any real benefit.

    >
    > What??
    >
    > Together with queries then these are the areas where ORM are good.
    >


    Maybe. But what is a benefit of using ORM and data classes instead of
    ResultSet and databound GUI controls?

    >>> What
    >>> would be real advantages in addition to greater independence and
    >>> portability?

    >>
    >> Why do you think ORM gives you greater independence (from what?) and
    >> portability?

    >
    > Most ORM's handle the database specific stuff without the developer
    > needing to know.


    I would say that's a myth. There is no way one can create a system that is
    using RDBMS without knowledge about relational databases.

    --
    Michal
    Michal Kleczek, Mar 24, 2011
    #11
  12. carmelo

    Silvio Guest

    On 03/23/2011 09:45 AM, carmelo wrote:
    > Hi everybody,
    > I would like your opinion regarding the use of ORM in web applications
    > built with GWT. I'm a little reconsider about the ORM, and I wonder
    > whether it is worth to use in web applications built with GWT. What
    > would be real advantages in addition to greater independence and
    > portability?
    >
    > Waiting for your comments :)


    If you consider the database a serialization/deserialization tool for
    your domain objects than an ORM might be your best choice.

    If the database is a deliverable on its own that will be used by other
    applications, either custom or standard stuff like reporting, analytical
    processing, ETL ..., or is pre-existing for similar reasons, then an ORM
    is usually more trouble than its worth.
    Silvio, Mar 24, 2011
    #12
  13. On 24.3.2011 5:08, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > Is JDBC worth using? I thought it was just a Java layer on top of ODBC.
    > Which nobody in their right mind uses.


    Sun's JDBC-ODBC bridge is what you say. It is just one driver for JDBC.

    JDBC itself has nothing to do with ODBC, and does not need or use it.
    Native so called "thin" drivers are used mostly. The connect to the
    database directly.

    --

    Q: Why don't Scotsmen ever have coffee the way they like it?
    A: Well, they like it with two lumps of sugar. If they drink
    it at home, they only take one, and if they drink it while
    visiting, they always take three.
    Donkey Hottie, Mar 24, 2011
    #13
  14. Lew wrote:

    > Michal Kleczek wrote:
    >> carmelo wrote:
    >>> I would like your opinion regarding the use of ORM in web applications
    >>> built with GWT. I'm a little reconsider about the ORM, and I wonder
    >>> whether it is worth to use in web applications built with GWT.

    >
    > GWT is a graphical user interface library, right? What possible influence
    > on the choice of persistence architecture could that have?
    >
    > Or am I wrong about GWT?
    >
    >> It depends on many things but IMHO the most important is "Do you have a
    >> rich domain object model?" (and by "rich" I mean you have a lot of
    >> important processing in your OO code - not just getters and setters).

    >
    > If not, go back and develop one before proceeding.
    >
    > Now we can proceed in the certainty that you do have one.
    >


    Right. IOW - you _always_ have an object model when programming in Java
    (since it is OO language). So take an example:

    Let's say the purpose of an app is to allow the user to manipulate data in a
    general ledger database (managed by a RDBMS).
    My object model is GWT widget library (a set of classes implementing user
    interface).
    Do you know of any ORM tool that will allow me to "map" one to another?

    Or maybe you are saying I should design and develop _another_ class library
    (an object model) and then design and develop _two_ mapping libraries (one
    of them possibly based on some ORM tool) to achieve the goal?

    --
    Michal
    Michal Kleczek, Mar 24, 2011
    #14
  15. Lew <> wrote:
    > Andreas Leitgeb wrote:
    >> Lew wrote:
    >>>> carmelo wrote:
    >>>>> I would like your opinion regarding the use of ORM in web applications
    >>>>> built with GWT. ...
    >>> GWT is a graphical user interface library, right?
    >>> Or am I wrong about GWT? [...]

    >> http://lmgtfy.com/?q=GWT
    >> ;-)

    > Good one!
    > It was a rhetorical question, though.


    I for myself wouldn't have called GWT a GUI-lib, but that may be due
    to an insufficient understanding of GWT or a differing definition of
    "Gui-library" on my side.
    Anyway, that's why I didn't see your answer as being rhetorical.
    Andreas Leitgeb, Mar 24, 2011
    #15
  16. carmelo

    Roedy Green Guest

    On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 01:45:11 -0700 (PDT), carmelo <>
    wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :

    >I would like your opinion regarding the use of ORM in web applications
    >built with GWT. I'm a little reconsider about the ORM, and I wonder
    >whether it is worth to use in web applications built with GWT. What
    >would be real advantages in addition to greater independence and
    >portability?
    >
    >Waiting for your comments :)


    You might enjoy my comments at
    http://mindprod.com/jgloss/sql.html#ALTERNATIVES
    Also http://mindprod.com/jgloss/pod.html

    Now with 64-bit Java and giant cheap VM, you might even do a project
    without any POD at all, just serialise everything every once in a
    while for backup. That would give you something very fast, but hard to
    change.

    --
    Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products
    http://mindprod.com
    If you think it’s expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur.
    ~ Red Adair
    Roedy Green, Mar 24, 2011
    #16
  17. carmelo

    Lew Guest

    On 03/24/2011 01:16 PM, Andreas Leitgeb wrote:
    > Lew<> wrote:
    >> Andreas Leitgeb wrote:
    >>> Lew wrote:
    >>>>> carmelo wrote:
    >>>>>> I would like your opinion regarding the use of ORM in web applications
    >>>>>> built with GWT. ...
    >>>> GWT is a graphical user interface library, right?
    >>>> Or am I wrong about GWT? [...]
    >>> http://lmgtfy.com/?q=GWT
    >>> ;-)

    >> Good one!
    >> It was a rhetorical question, though.

    >
    > I for myself wouldn't have called GWT a GUI-lib, but that may be due
    > to an insufficient understanding of GWT or a differing definition of
    > "Gui-library" on my side.
    > Anyway, that's why I didn't see your answer as being rhetorical.


    Ooh, goody! I have an opportunity to learn something. (Clicking on the
    LMGTFY link you thoughtfully provided.)

    Thank you.

    --
    Lew
    Honi soit qui mal y pense.
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Friz.jpg
    Lew, Mar 24, 2011
    #17
  18. carmelo

    Lew Guest

    On 03/24/2011 06:35 AM, Michal Kleczek wrote:
    > Lew wrote:
    >
    >> Michal Kleczek wrote:
    >>> carmelo wrote:
    >>>> I would like your opinion regarding the use of ORM in web applications
    >>>> built with GWT. I'm a little reconsider about the ORM, and I wonder
    >>>> whether it is worth to use in web applications built with GWT.

    >>
    >> GWT is a graphical user interface library, right? What possible influence
    >> on the choice of persistence architecture could that have?
    >>
    >> Or am I wrong about GWT?
    >>
    >>> It depends on many things but IMHO the most important is "Do you have a
    >>> rich domain object model?" (and by "rich" I mean you have a lot of
    >>> important processing in your OO code - not just getters and setters).

    >>
    >> If not, go back and develop one before proceeding.
    >>
    >> Now we can proceed in the certainty that you do have one.
    >>

    >
    > Right. IOW - you _always_ have an object model when programming in Java
    > (since it is OO language). So take an example:
    >
    > Let's say the purpose of an app is to allow the user to manipulate data in a
    > general ledger database (managed by a RDBMS).
    > My object model is GWT widget library (a set of classes implementing user
    > interface).
    > Do you know of any ORM tool that will allow me to "map" one to another?
    >
    > Or maybe you are saying I should design and develop _another_ class library
    > (an object model) and then design and develop _two_ mapping libraries (one
    > of them possibly based on some ORM tool) to achieve the goal?


    No, but it is an antipattern to couple graphical widgets directly to the data
    in the fashion you describe. Plus there is no framework such as you ask.

    Widgets display values of objects, not data tables. Any framework that lets
    the widgets use your data has to translate the data into an object. That's
    what an ORM does, and that's what you will have to do by hand if not with a
    framework.

    You call that "two mapping layers". That isn't accurate. GWT is written to
    use objects. You map the data into the objects that it uses, using any JPA or
    other ORM tool, or via raw JDBC. That's only a single mapping.

    --
    Lew
    Honi soit qui mal y pense.
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Friz.jpg
    Lew, Mar 24, 2011
    #18
  19. carmelo

    Lew Guest

    On 03/24/2011 03:18 AM, Michal Kleczek wrote:
    > Arne Vajhøj wrote:
    >
    >> On 23-03-2011 07:26, Michal Kleczek wrote:
    >>> It depends on many things but IMHO the most important is "Do you have a
    >>> rich domain object model?" (and by "rich" I mean you have a lot of
    >>> important processing in your OO code - not just getters and setters).

    >>
    >> What??
    >>
    >> Most ORM data classes are pure data classes.
    >>

    >
    > Exactly my point - if that is the case then maintainig those classes and ORM
    > mapping code just adds cost without giving any benefits.
    > Been there done that, no thanks.


    But it is the right thing to do despite your objection.

    JPA adds significant benefit in the most common use cases for it.

    > Maybe. But what is a benefit of using ORM and data classes instead of
    > ResultSet and databound GUI controls?


    Databound GUI controls are not part of GWT that I can quickly find, and they
    are not as flexible in some ways as the GWT/AWT/Swing approach. These latter
    are based on separation of Model and View (and Controller), a strong best
    practice. With ORMs you don't have to pick column by column out of a
    ResultSet and manually copy the data into a domain object (or widget). With
    ORMs you construct your logic thinking in terms of object model (i.e., domain
    model) and the relationships from the domain. The boilerplate to handle
    persistence is abstracted away from the object manipulation, making for
    cleaner, more maintainable code. (If you use it right, as with any library.)
    The risk of error is reduced. The speed to working code is greatly increased.

    So reduced risk, easier coding, enhanced productivity and use of best practices.


    >>>> What
    >>>> would be real advantages in addition to greater independence and
    >>>> portability?
    >>>
    >>> Why do you think ORM gives you greater independence (from what?) and
    >>> portability?

    >>
    >> Most ORM's handle the database specific stuff without the developer
    >> needing to know.

    >
    > I would say that's a myth. There is no way one can create a system that is
    > using RDBMS without knowledge about relational databases.


    True. But the ORM separates that knowledge into its own layer so that it
    doesn't commingle with or corrupt the object-oriented layers of the code.

    The imnpedance match between the ORM stuff and the rest of the application is
    much better than between SQL and the rest of the application.

    I've implemented the exact same apps using JDBC, monolithic DAOs with JDBC,
    and with JPA. The JPA approach was the cleanest, most compact and easiest to
    create of the three.

    --
    Lew
    Honi soit qui mal y pense.
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Friz.jpg
    Lew, Mar 24, 2011
    #19
  20. carmelo

    Lew Guest

    On 03/24/2011 04:17 AM, Silvio wrote:
    > On 03/23/2011 09:45 AM, carmelo wrote:
    >> Hi everybody,
    >> I would like your opinion regarding the use of ORM in web applications
    >> built with GWT. I'm a little reconsider about the ORM, and I wonder
    >> whether it is worth to use in web applications built with GWT. What
    >> would be real advantages in addition to greater independence and
    >> portability?
    >>
    >> Waiting for your comments :)

    >
    > If you consider the database a serialization/deserialization tool for your
    > domain objects than an ORM might be your best choice.
    >
    > If the database is a deliverable on its own that will be used by other
    > applications, either custom or standard stuff like reporting, analytical
    > processing, ETL ..., or is pre-existing for similar reasons, then an ORM is
    > usually more trouble than its worth.


    Bullshit.

    Besides the fact that you are vague about "usually", "trouble" and "its
    worth", others' experience is the exact opposite.

    JPA ORMs work great on existing databases used by multiple functional units.
    They save a tonne of trouble and add very little, if properly approached.
    They provide great worth. You can very quickly get to the object model needed
    by the functional unit off any data source, shared or not, whether that model
    differs from other consumers of the data store or not. It saves you
    boilerplate, cleans up separation of layers, and smooths the core logic of an
    application to use JPA.

    Why would a database's pre-existence have any negative effect whatsoever on
    the value of an ORM?

    If anything, JPA's value is all the greater in that scenario. You focus one
    set of effort on getting the mapping right, a separate set on the logic, you
    actually get increased parallelization of work in a team, especially across
    all those multiple consumers of the data.

    That is not to say that every functional unit would use only JPA. It has
    limits. Just not the ones you said.

    --
    Lew
    Honi soit qui mal y pense.
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Friz.jpg
    Lew, Mar 24, 2011
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    621
  2. Alessio Stalla

    Re: ORM or JDBC?

    Alessio Stalla, Mar 23, 2011, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    254
    Tom Anderson
    Mar 24, 2011
  3. Alessio Stalla

    Re: ORM or JDBC?

    Alessio Stalla, Mar 24, 2011, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    20
    Views:
    593
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Mar 27, 2011
  4. Alessio Stalla

    Re: ORM or JDBC?

    Alessio Stalla, Mar 25, 2011, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    227
  5. Alessio Stalla

    Re: ORM or JDBC?

    Alessio Stalla, Mar 25, 2011, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    236
    Daniele Futtorovic
    Mar 25, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page