This week's book giveaway is in the Jobs Discussion forum.
We're giving away four copies of Java Interview Guide and have Anthony DePalma on-line!
See this thread for details.
The moose likes Beginning Java and the fly likes Serializable Interface Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login

Win a copy of Java Interview Guide this week in the Jobs Discussion forum!
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Java » Beginning Java
Bookmark "Serializable Interface" Watch "Serializable Interface" New topic

Serializable Interface

vidya Sreedharan

Joined: Jun 27, 2007
Posts: 4

Is it possible to persist an object to a database without implementing Serializable marker interface ?

Ulf Dittmer

Joined: Mar 22, 2005
Posts: 42965
"Persist" can be understood to mean many different things. APIs like JPA work with annotations to indicate how objects should be persisted to a DB.

Persisting a serialized binary version of an object is a fraught business that should be avoided. Slightly better (if using something like JPA is not an option) would be to use the java.beans.XMLEncoder/XMLDecoder classes (assuming that the objects follow JavaBean semantics).
Sagar Rohankar
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 19, 2008
Posts: 2904

Ulf, are you suggesting that plain serialization of object is not good choice and you should look for other option like, XMLEncoder/Decoder ?

[LEARNING bLOG] | [Freelance Web Designer] | [and "Rohan" is part of my surname]
Ulf Dittmer

Joined: Mar 22, 2005
Posts: 42965
Yes. There are valid uses for binary serialization, but storing objects in a DB is not one of them.
I agree. Here's the link:
subject: Serializable Interface
jQuery in Action, 3rd edition