This week's book giveaway is in the OO, Patterns, UML and Refactoring forum.
We're giving away four copies of Refactoring for Software Design Smells: Managing Technical Debt and have Girish Suryanarayana, Ganesh Samarthyam & Tushar Sharma on-line!
See this thread for details.
The moose likes EJB Certification (SCBCD/OCPJBCD) and the fly likes Why local interfaces only for container managed relationships Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login


JavaRanch » Java Forums » Certification » EJB Certification (SCBCD/OCPJBCD)
Bookmark "Why local interfaces only for container managed relationships" Watch "Why local interfaces only for container managed relationships" New topic
Author

Why local interfaces only for container managed relationships

Kumar Raja
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 18, 2010
Posts: 547
    
    2

Hi,

I was reading through "Head First EJB" and read that container managed relationships would be handled by local interfaces not remote. From the book "CMR relationship can be only a local component interface but not remote". Why did Sun restrict this? What is the motive behind that.

Typically database would be in its own layer and could be remote to the jvm on which beans are running. Then what difference does it make if we use a remote vs local interfaces to define the CMR. I understand that it is a spec, but what made them (sun) to think in this angle.


Regards
KumarRaja

 
Have you checked out Aspose?
 
subject: Why local interfaces only for container managed relationships
 
It's not a secret anymore!