Hi there, Come thing to consider about accessing LDAP through J2EE is whether you will use session or entity beans and, if the latter, whether you will use CMP or BMP, as well as CMT or BMT. In a past project I worked on, we originally used a BMP / CMT entity bean and found that performance suffered using CMT. Once we switched to BMT performance improved quite a bit. But we didn't really achieve good performance until we switched from using entity beans to session beans. A cautionary note about using LDAP however -- code used to manage deletions, modifications, and insertions can be complex depending on the layout of your schema and the type of updates you need to do. Darryl
I'm a little confused by one point. Your post seems to suggest you switched from using CMT to BMT entity beans. Surely entity beans are not allowed to use BMT or have I mis-read your post, or more likely have I missed something? Thanks.
Nik, You're correct about entity beans not being allowed to be BMT (CMT only). However, Darry1 also mentioned about switching from an entity bean to a session bean. Darly, can you clarify what exactly happened? Curious, Ray Gill
Originally posted by Ramon Gill: Nik, You're correct about entity beans not being allowed to be BMT (CMT only). However, Darry1 also mentioned about switching from an entity bean to a session bean. Darly, can you clarify what exactly happened? Curious, Ray Gill
It seems to me that, although Entities can have no such BMT attribute, a BMP Entity that is used outside the context of a Transaction is effectively having its "transactional state" managed by the Bean. Perhaps this is what the previous comments are implying. In my limited knowledge of this topic, it seems that nothing would stop you from doing this (example)... You have a SLSB with Never that accesses a BMP Entity which it reads and updates. Given that you are brave enough to do this, it should work. If you deploy the session bean as BMT with Required, say, it should still be able to access and update the BMP Entity. I can see why you might want to informally call the Entity a "BMT" Entity. But its really the persistence of the Entity that the bean is managing, and the container does the same things to the Entity's lifecycle as it would normally do (threat it as CMT). I should really set up an executable example of this to confirm what it does. Comment's from anyone who knows better?
Juan Rolando Prieur-Reza, M.S., LSSBB, SCEA, SCBCD, SCWCD, SCJP/1.6, IBM OOAD, SCSA