OFBiz › OFBiz - User

Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

29 messages Options

Adrian Crum-2

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

I believe the possibilities of discussion could advance if you could provide a small example of how data is accessed currently versus how the same data would be accessed with SDO.

-Adrian

--- On Fri, 3/12/10, Rodrigo Lima <[hidden email]> wrote:

> From: Rodrigo Lima <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier
> To: [hidden email]
> Date: Friday, March 12, 2010, 6:55 PM
> I believe that without further
> research on SDO, XQuery and XPath, we're
> unable to advance the possibilities and discussion.
> The data layer (not just DB) must be divided into the
> minimum degree 2
> responsibilities.
> Were they:
> 1) Physical Data
> 2) Logical Data
>
> This concept is called a Data Services Layer.
> Please, this is not WEB Service.
>
> I do not look like the owner of the truth, however, I see
> that there are
> many gains have this layer as an asset beyond the Entity
> Manager.
>
>
> 2010/3/12 Ruth Hoffman <[hidden email]>
>
> > Hi Rodrigo:
> > I'm really not understanding your arguments. Could you
> elaborate?
> >
> >
> > Rodrigo Lima wrote:
> >
> >> David,
> >>
> >> SDO is intended to give applications an
> easy-to-use, uniform programming
> >> model for accessing and updating data, regardless
> of the underlying source
> >> or format of the data.
> >>
> >>
> > Isn't that what the Entity Engine does? What am I
> missing here?
> >
> > The Service Data Objects (SDO) API allows client
> applications to read and
> >> update the data through a typed or untyped
> interface.
> >> However, unlike a conventional Web service, at the
> core of each data
> >> service
> >> is an XML data type.
> >>
> >>
> > I don't understand, Web services are all about XML
> data types.
> >
> > The network is accessed again only when the
> client wants to apply the data
> >> changes to the source.
> >>
> >>
> > What does SDO have to do with network access? Isn't
> this just keeping stuff
> > in memory (caching ) vs. writing to persistent
> storage?
> >
> > Disconnected data access contributes to a
> scalable, efficient computing
> >> environment because back-end system resources are
> never tied up for very
> >> long.
> >>
> >>
> > In real life, I found the opposite to be true.
> Enterprises spend more time
> > and effort synchronizing their back-end data resources
> then they do using
> > them. Performance, reliability and usability always
> suffer. This is the
> > age-old argument of centralized vs decentralized
> computing. Maybe I don't
> > understand what you are trying to say here?
> >
> > I suggest also apply the concept of SDO with
> XQuery and XPath
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2010/3/12 David E Jones <[hidden email]>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> The SDO stuff (that was originally WDO) seems
> to be more related to the
> >>> service engine in OFBiz than to the entity
> engine. I might be
> >>> misunderstanding that though...
> >>>
> >>> Whatever the case, what is it that you like
> about SDO, or how does it
> >>> make
> >>> your life easier?
> >>>
> >>> -David
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Mar 11, 2010, at 6:43 PM, Rodrigo Lima
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Hi David,
> >>>>
> >>>> I believe it is worth following in a path
> parallel to the Entity Engine,
> >>>> which already has its
> >>>> value and trust already established.
> >>>> A model that looks interesting data model
> would be to create a layer as
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> the
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> SDO (Service Data Objects
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_Data_Objects)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> to
> >>>> services layer, which could easily be used
> by various technologies UI
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> Tier.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> A great detail is the question of objects
> typed and untyped.
> >>>>
> >>>> Some might say that this issue is easily
> solved with Web Services,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> however,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> in practice, it is not so simple for many
> platforms.
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>>
> >>>> Rodrigo
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 2010/3/11 Nicolas Malin <[hidden email]>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> -1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> BJ, Ruth,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Saying that OFBiz should move in the
> same way that other projects is a
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> bit
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> stupid, and show that you've not fully
> understand OFBiz and the entity
> >>>>> engine.
> >>>>> It is now 7 years I'm working on
> OFBiz, and I have made the same error
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> at
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> the beginning as others, I did'nt
> understood at the moment the beauty of
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> the
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> entityengine.
> >>>>> Looking back at my hard start, I'm
> glad having done this error, and now
> >>>>> more than mastering the entity engine,
> and all its abilities in tems of
> >>>>> connections, abstractions, and more.
> >>>>> The only fault I found was on huge
> customers projects where there were
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> big
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> business needs.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> At LibrenBerry and Nereide, we've then
> added generators to fill the
> >>>>> gap,
> >>>>> and this remove nothing from the
> entity-engine capabilities, but add
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> more
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> smoothness in its use. The combination
> form/screen/minilang is as strong
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> as
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> before and more stronger. For big business
> needs, where java is needed,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> the
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> generated code is more reliable (who never
> has made on error on Strings
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> ?).
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> for an example, you can take a look to
> neogia accounting code, to see
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> how
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> entity-engine and code generation
> combination is valuable.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From our side, it is sure that helping
> development by generation is not
> >>>>> revolutionizing OFBiz, and should not
> do it, noone told to replace
> >>>>> entity-engine with hibernate.
> >>>>> Generation is adding a bigger
> flexibility and a more reliable product.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From my point of view, OFBiz is more
> than just an ERP. It is also a
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> strong
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> base for any project, from the small ones
> to the big ones. Adding MDA
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> tools
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> in its data model can only be a good
> thing.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>> Nicolas
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ruth Hoffman a écrit :
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +1
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Thank you BJ.
> >>>>>> Ruth
> >>>>>>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> "myofbiz"
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> [hidden email]
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> BJ Freeman wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Let me ask this, if all these
> other approaches are better why is
> >>>>>>> there
> >>>>>>> not a application like ofbiz
> done in them, without using ofbiz at
> >>>>>>> all?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I keep getting the feeling
> that those that want major changes don't
> >>>>>>> really understand the design
> goals of ofbiz.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> =======================
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> BJ Freeman
> >>>>>>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
> >>>>>>> Strategic Power Office with
> Supplier Automation <
> >>>>>>> http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
> >>>>>>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to
> Assist
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Chat Y! messenger:
> bjfr33man
> >>>>>>> Linkedin
> >>>>>>> <
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>> http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> [hidden email]
> sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> While reading the sentence
> "There are many people out there who
> >>>>>>>> don't
> >>>>>>>> understand the Entity
> Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> are
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> absolutely much more people "out there",
> and I'm sure the OFBIZ
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> project
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on
> asking "Hibernate",
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "Spring",
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ
> framework DID do a right thing - to provide
> >>>>>>>> developers an integrated
> framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
> >>>>>>>> developer can define
> entity in one place and share the entity
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> definition
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> across different tiers, form persistence
> to presentation. This kind
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> of
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> integration saved developers a lot from
> typings and preserved
> >>>>>>>> consistency across
> different application tiers. But, this is not
> >>>>>>>> what
> >>>>>>>> Entity Engine itself can
> provide. All gains come from the
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> integration.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity
> engine into a stand alone ORM
> >>>>>>>> like tool, I bet its not
> very attractive and only people familiar
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> with
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> OFBIZ already will use it.
> >>>>>>>> On the other hand, if
> there are another framework such as Grails
> >>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>> can provide at least same
> level of cross tier integration ability,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> while
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN
> technologies (such as
> >>>>>>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM,
> Spring for service tier component
> >>>>>>>> composition,
> >>>>>>>> Spring MVC for view tier
> framework). Sounds a little bit attractive
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> than
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>> Miles.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at
> 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Hi David:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Nothing! I think this
> is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> many
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> people out there who don't understand the
> Entity Engine value
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> proposition.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> That is why they keep asking for
> "Hibernate" etc.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Here's some things I'd
> consider as additions:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> * Maybe making a
> separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
> >>>>>>>>> Engine.
> Take it out of WebTools.
> >>>>>>>>> * Include in
> that webapp any security/role management specific to
> >>>>>>>>> the
> Entity Engine.
> >>>>>>>>> * Entity Engine
> performance tools (or more information on how to
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> use
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> existing tools).
> >>>>>>>>> * Better backup
> tools (or more information on how to use existing
> >>>>>>>>> tools).
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> More to come...
> >>>>>>>>> Ruth
> >>>>>>>>>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>> Find me on the web at
> http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
> >>>>>>>>> "myofbiz"
> >>>>>>>>> [hidden email]
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> David E Jones wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> If you could
> change anything about the data tier in OFBiz
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> (basically
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> the Entity Engine), what would you
> change?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> All comments are
> welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> see
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> used instead of the Entity Engine, please
> describe what you like
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> about it
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> (like "I want to have an Java class for
> each table in my database")
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> instead
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> of just mentioning the tool (like "let's
> use Hibernate!").
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Why am I asking?
> This topic comes up every once in a while, and
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> it's
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> true that many suggestions never get
> enough support to actually
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> happen (or
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> on further research it is decided that the
> idea is not tenable),
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> but
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> brainstorming about them to get ideas in
> the open is still a great
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> thing.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> The history of OFBiz is full of things
> like this where users and
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> more casual
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> contributors had ideas and saw
> possibilities that others, even more
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> involved
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> contributors, totally missed or never
> looked at that way. What I
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> think would
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to
> keep this mostly to
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> brainstorming
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> and not do too much comparing of ideas.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> BTW, if you want
> to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> UI
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> tiers) please use the other threads on
> those. If you'd like to
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> discuss
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> things that aren't specific to a tier look
> for the "General"
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> thread.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> -David
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>> Nicolas MALIN
> >>>>> Consultant
> >>>>> Tél : 06.17.66.40.06
> >>>>> Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/
> >>>>> -------
> >>>>> Société LibrenBerry
> >>>>> Tél : 02.48.02.56.12
> >>>>> Site : http://www.librenberry.net/
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>

Vince Clark

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

In reply to this post by BJ Freeman

BJ - there is an application that uses many of these other tools. It is not open source, but is assembled entirely from open source tools.

http://elasticpath.com/whatweoffer/ecommerce-platform/

It is not exactly like OFBiz. It doesn't attempt to be an entire ERP system. But close enough for comparison here.

Vince Clark
[hidden email]
(303) 493-6723 office
(303) 523-4843 cell

----- Original Message -----
From: "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 10:04:08 AM
Subject: Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?

I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
really understand the design goals of ofbiz.

=======================

BJ Freeman
http://bjfreeman.elance.com
Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>

Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist

Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man
Linkedin
<http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>

[hidden email] sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:

> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There are
> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ project
> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", "Spring",
> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
>
> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity definition
> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind of
> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the integration.
> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar with
> OFBIZ already will use it.
>
> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability, while
> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive than
> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
>
> Regards,
> Miles.
>
> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>> Hi David:
>>
>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are many
>> people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value
>> proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>
>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>
>> * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>> Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>> * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>> the Entity Engine.
>> * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to use
>> existing tools).
>> * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>> tools).
>>
>> More to come...
>> Ruth
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>> [hidden email]
>>
>> David E Jones wrote:
>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>
>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>
>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>
>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>

BJ Freeman

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

In reply to this post by David E. Jones-2

thanks Vince.
I would first look at the Data model it used compared to the Data model
put forth in the Data model resource books. Does it cover all the data
that the Data model that ofbiz has.

ofbiz, in my view is not just an ERP application, but a Data and
functional framework on which one of many application that is ERP is built.

Currently I have a many type of applications built on ofbiz Data model.
So I admit i am resistant to change, because of the manpower it would
take to convert.

And I believe that is the motivation of those presenting such sweeping
changes. They are most familiar with the technology they are promoting.
Admittedly ofbiz is not the easiest thing to learn and since it is not
used outside ofbiz is not a general usage thing.

Most talk about ERP, since it seems to be a Big Ticket(money) item.

As a side note when I first moved to Java OO before I got to ofbiz, I
had code to covert DB into a class for each table and procedures as
methods. I don't consider this the optimum way to maintain or design an
application(s) from Data to UI with the less amount of labor.

In summation I would say that if someone presents a path to change to
their format from ofbiz and convince me their method of maintainence is
better, I might be interested.

=======================

BJ Freeman
http://bjfreeman.elance.com
Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>

Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist

Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man
Linkedin
<http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>

Vince Clark sent the following on 3/13/2010 6:52 AM:

> BJ - there is an application that uses many of these other tools. It is not open source, but is assembled entirely from open source tools.
>
> http://elasticpath.com/whatweoffer/ecommerce-platform/
>
> It is not exactly like OFBiz. It doesn't attempt to be an entire ERP system. But close enough for comparison here.
>
> Vince Clark
> [hidden email]
> (303) 493-6723 office
> (303) 523-4843 cell
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 10:04:08 AM
> Subject: Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier
>
>
> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?
>
> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
> really understand the design goals of ofbiz.
>
> =======================
>
> BJ Freeman
> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>
> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>
> Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man
> Linkedin
> <http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>
>
>
> [hidden email] sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There are
>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ project
>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", "Spring",
>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
>>
>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity definition
>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind of
>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the integration.
>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar with
>> OFBIZ already will use it.
>>
>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability, while
>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive than
>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Miles.
>>
>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>> Hi David:
>>>
>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are many
>>> people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value
>>> proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>>
>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>>
>>> * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>> Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>> * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>> the Entity Engine.
>>> * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to use
>>> existing tools).
>>> * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>> tools).
>>>
>>> More to come...
>>> Ruth
>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>>> [hidden email]
>>>
>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>>
>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>>
>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>>
>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>>>>
>>>> -David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

Vince Clark

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

In reply to this post by David E. Jones-2

Like I said BJ, it is not exactly like OFBiz. But I felt it was a good comparison for this discussion.

I am not technically proficient at a deep enough level to make a case for or against changing out any part of the stack. If I were going to make a case for it I would probably point to adoption as my reason rather than any specific technical point. There are a lot of developers and development managers out there that are experienced with the tools being mentioned in this thread such as Spring and Hibernate. Using familiar tools helps with adoption.

----- Original Message -----
From: "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2010 10:04:50 AM
Subject: Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

thanks Vince.
I would first look at the Data model it used compared to the Data model
put forth in the Data model resource books. Does it cover all the data
that the Data model that ofbiz has.

ofbiz, in my view is not just an ERP application, but a Data and
functional framework on which one of many application that is ERP is built.

Currently I have a many type of applications built on ofbiz Data model.
So I admit i am resistant to change, because of the manpower it would
take to convert.

And I believe that is the motivation of those presenting such sweeping
changes. They are most familiar with the technology they are promoting.
Admittedly ofbiz is not the easiest thing to learn and since it is not
used outside ofbiz is not a general usage thing.

Most talk about ERP, since it seems to be a Big Ticket(money) item.

As a side note when I first moved to Java OO before I got to ofbiz, I
had code to covert DB into a class for each table and procedures as
methods. I don't consider this the optimum way to maintain or design an
application(s) from Data to UI with the less amount of labor.

In summation I would say that if someone presents a path to change to
their format from ofbiz and convince me their method of maintainence is
better, I might be interested.

=======================

BJ Freeman
http://bjfreeman.elance.com
Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>

Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist

Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man
Linkedin
<http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>

Vince Clark sent the following on 3/13/2010 6:52 AM:

BJ Freeman

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

In reply to this post by David E. Jones-2

as long a the tools can accomplish the same thing then yes.
My perspective is more the life cycle of the software.
most of what I have heard about tools is the ease of getting up and
running. I don't hear much about maintainence.
for instance if you change a data member, how many places does one have
to touch code to have that data member change show up.

there is a thing about code stability. the More places you have to touch
code the less reliable the code is, after the changes and the more time
testing.

I come from the experience of testing in black box so you have input and
output for each box. so you only have to change a particular box and
all the rest not dependent on that box stay stable.

The other perspective I have is when I started with C I could compile
code into 2K then C plus came along and the same Hello world now
compiled into 10k with no advantage for the simple app.

I see ofbiz similar to the original C but with the power of C plus
without bloat.

========================

BJ Freeman
http://bjfreeman.elance.com
Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>

Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist

Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man
Linkedin
<http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>

Vince Clark sent the following on 3/13/2010 1:51 PM:

> Like I said BJ, it is not exactly like OFBiz. But I felt it was a good comparison for this discussion.
>
> I am not technically proficient at a deep enough level to make a case for or against changing out any part of the stack. If I were going to make a case for it I would probably point to adoption as my reason rather than any specific technical point. There are a lot of developers and development managers out there that are experienced with the tools being mentioned in this thread such as Spring and Hibernate. Using familiar tools helps with adoption.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2010 10:04:50 AM
> Subject: Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier
>
> thanks Vince.
> I would first look at the Data model it used compared to the Data model
> put forth in the Data model resource books. Does it cover all the data
> that the Data model that ofbiz has.
>
> ofbiz, in my view is not just an ERP application, but a Data and
> functional framework on which one of many application that is ERP is built.
>
> Currently I have a many type of applications built on ofbiz Data model.
> So I admit i am resistant to change, because of the manpower it would
> take to convert.
>
> And I believe that is the motivation of those presenting such sweeping
> changes. They are most familiar with the technology they are promoting.
> Admittedly ofbiz is not the easiest thing to learn and since it is not
> used outside ofbiz is not a general usage thing.
>
> Most talk about ERP, since it seems to be a Big Ticket(money) item.
>
> As a side note when I first moved to Java OO before I got to ofbiz, I
> had code to covert DB into a class for each table and procedures as
> methods. I don't consider this the optimum way to maintain or design an
> application(s) from Data to UI with the less amount of labor.
>
> In summation I would say that if someone presents a path to change to
> their format from ofbiz and convince me their method of maintainence is
> better, I might be interested.
>
>
>
>
>
> =======================
>
> BJ Freeman
> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>
> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>
> Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man
> Linkedin
> <http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>
>
>
> Vince Clark sent the following on 3/13/2010 6:52 AM:
>> BJ - there is an application that uses many of these other tools. It is not open source, but is assembled entirely from open source tools.
>>
>> http://elasticpath.com/whatweoffer/ecommerce-platform/
>>
>> It is not exactly like OFBiz. It doesn't attempt to be an entire ERP system. But close enough for comparison here.
>>
>> Vince Clark
>> [hidden email]
>> (303) 493-6723 office
>> (303) 523-4843 cell
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]>
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 10:04:08 AM
>> Subject: Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier
>>
>>
>> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
>> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?
>>
>> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
>> really understand the design goals of ofbiz.
>>
>> =======================
>>
>> BJ Freeman
>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>>
>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>>
>> Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man
>> Linkedin
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>
>>
>>
>> [hidden email] sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
>>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
>>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There are
>>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ project
>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", "Spring",
>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
>>>
>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
>>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
>>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity definition
>>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind of
>>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
>>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
>>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the integration.
>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
>>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar with
>>> OFBIZ already will use it.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
>>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability, while
>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
>>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive than
>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Miles.
>>>
>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>> Hi David:
>>>>
>>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are many
>>>> people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value
>>>> proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>>>
>>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>>>
>>>> * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>>> Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>>> * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>>> the Entity Engine.
>>>> * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to use
>>>> existing tools).
>>>> * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>>> tools).
>>>>
>>>> More to come...
>>>> Ruth
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>>>
>>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>>>
>>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>>>>>
>>>>> -David
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

BJ Freeman

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

In reply to this post by Ruth Hoffman-2

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3556

if anyone once to help.

=========================
BJ Freeman
http://bjfreeman.elance.com
Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>

Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist

Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man
Linkedin
<http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>

Tim Ruppert sent the following on 3/11/2010 7:27 AM:

> +1 - another thing to add to this list would be the ability to roll back an upgrade or data load so that if issues are found that we can get back, in the system, directly to where we started. Normally we do this with a staging upgrade first and a db backup second, but having something like this in the system has been requested a few times, so I thought I'd mention it.
>
> Cheers,
> Ruppert
>
> On Mar 11, 2010, at 8:23 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>
>> Hi David:
>>
>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are many people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>
>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>
>> * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>> Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>> * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>> the Entity Engine.
>> * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to use
>> existing tools).
>> * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>> tools).
>>
>> More to come...
>> Ruth
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>> [hidden email]
>>
>> David E Jones wrote:
>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>
>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>
>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>
>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>

Malin Nicolas

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

In reply to this post by David E. Jones-2

Hi David,

Yes, I remember very well this discussion ;) .
From my POV, compilation is good but has some limitations. Interpreting
is also good, and has other limitations. So mixing both, and adding some
good practices is then a very nice way to go.

In neogia, we are using generated java files from entitymodel for
developping java code.
One Entity is then transformed in two classes : EntityBase.java and
EntityService.java. Generated files contains an attributes list, some
getter/setter and functions to get associations. It's a heritage of
GenericValue so we can use as GV or Object oriented method. This make
easier big java service development with ide auto-completion,
simplification to read complexe object as DynamicView and possibility to
switch in oriented object code and relational code (to select to best
approch as appropriate)
We also added other functions as edit / remove / beforeStore ... but
they will pass to deprecated because intrepreted language is really
better for that and I prefer use the auto-entity service and seca .

I'm sure we can improve the generators for a better integration with the
OFBiz concept ;) if the OFBiz community is interested.

Nicolas

David E Jones a écrit :

> Nicolas,
>
> I guess this goes back to discussions on approach even as basic as compiled versus interpreted languages, or at least the issue of typos in variable names.
>
> What is it that you like about having these generated classes to use? You mentioned auto-completion in IDEs and compile time variable name and type checking. Are there other ways this makes your life easier, or is that the main point?
>
> -David
>
>
> On Mar 11, 2010, at 1:34 PM, Nicolas Malin wrote:
>
>
>> -1
>>
>> BJ, Ruth,
>>
>> Saying that OFBiz should move in the same way that other projects is a bit stupid, and show that you've not fully understand OFBiz and the entity engine.
>> It is now 7 years I'm working on OFBiz, and I have made the same error at the beginning as others, I did'nt understood at the moment the beauty of the entityengine.
>> Looking back at my hard start, I'm glad having done this error, and now more than mastering the entity engine, and all its abilities in tems of connections, abstractions, and more.
>> The only fault I found was on huge customers projects where there were big business needs.
>>
>> At LibrenBerry and Nereide, we've then added generators to fill the gap, and this remove nothing from the entity-engine capabilities, but add more smoothness in its use. The combination form/screen/minilang is as strong as before and more stronger. For big business needs, where java is needed, the generated code is more reliable (who never has made on error on Strings ?). for an example, you can take a look to neogia accounting code, to see how entity-engine and code generation combination is valuable.
>>
>> From our side, it is sure that helping development by generation is not revolutionizing OFBiz, and should not do it, noone told to replace entity-engine with hibernate.
>> Generation is adding a bigger flexibility and a more reliable product.
>>
>> From my point of view, OFBiz is more than just an ERP. It is also a strong base for any project, from the small ones to the big ones. Adding MDA tools in its data model can only be a good thing.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Nicolas
>>
>> Ruth Hoffman a écrit :
>>
>>> +1
>>> Thank you BJ.
>>> Ruth
>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>>> [hidden email]
>>>
>>> BJ Freeman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
>>>> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?
>>>>
>>>> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
>>>> really understand the design goals of ofbiz.
>>>>
>>>> =======================
>>>>
>>>> BJ Freeman
>>>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
>>>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
>>>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>>>>
>>>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>>>>
>>>> Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man
>>>> Linkedin
>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [hidden email] sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
>>>>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There are
>>>>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ project
>>>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", "Spring",
>>>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
>>>>>
>>>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
>>>>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
>>>>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity definition
>>>>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind of
>>>>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
>>>>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
>>>>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the integration.
>>>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
>>>>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar with
>>>>> OFBIZ already will use it.
>>>>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
>>>>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability, while
>>>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
>>>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
>>>>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive than
>>>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Miles.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi David:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are many people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>>>>> Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>>>>> * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>>>>> the Entity Engine.
>>>>>> * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to use
>>>>>> existing tools).
>>>>>> * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>>>>> tools).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> More to come...
>>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>> --
>> Nicolas MALIN
>> Consultant
>> Tél : 06.17.66.40.06
>> Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/
>> -------
>> Société LibrenBerry
>> Tél : 02.48.02.56.12
>> Site : http://www.librenberry.net/
>>
>>
>
>

--
Nicolas MALIN
Consultant
Tél : 06.17.66.40.06
Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/
-------
Société LibrenBerry
Tél : 02.48.02.56.12
Site : http://www.librenberry.net/

BJ Freeman

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

In reply to this post by Ruth Hoffman-2

there must be an mis understanding.
I don't think ofbiz should change just so others people can have it
easier, at the expense of the ofbiz design.

btw I have been using ofbiz about as long as you.
I started with java OO and found that I was touching to many points in code.
Ofbiz design provided a lot less touch points to accomplish the same
thing. thus has a faster to market design time and less maintainence, IMHO.

======================
BJ Freeman
http://bjfreeman.elance.com
Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>

Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist

Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man
Linkedin
<http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>

Nicolas Malin sent the following on 3/11/2010 12:34 PM:

> -1
>
> BJ, Ruth,
>
> Saying that OFBiz should move in the same way that other projects is a
> bit stupid, and show that you've not fully understand OFBiz and the
> entity engine.
> It is now 7 years I'm working on OFBiz, and I have made the same error
> at the beginning as others, I did'nt understood at the moment the beauty
> of the entityengine.
> Looking back at my hard start, I'm glad having done this error, and now
> more than mastering the entity engine, and all its abilities in tems of
> connections, abstractions, and more.
> The only fault I found was on huge customers projects where there were
> big business needs.
>
> At LibrenBerry and Nereide, we've then added generators to fill the gap,
> and this remove nothing from the entity-engine capabilities, but add
> more smoothness in its use. The combination form/screen/minilang is as
> strong as before and more stronger. For big business needs, where java
> is needed, the generated code is more reliable (who never has made on
> error on Strings ?). for an example, you can take a look to neogia
> accounting code, to see how entity-engine and code generation
> combination is valuable.
>
> From our side, it is sure that helping development by generation is not
> revolutionizing OFBiz, and should not do it, noone told to replace
> entity-engine with hibernate.
> Generation is adding a bigger flexibility and a more reliable product.
>
> From my point of view, OFBiz is more than just an ERP. It is also a
> strong base for any project, from the small ones to the big ones. Adding
> MDA tools in its data model can only be a good thing.
>
> Cheers,
> Nicolas
>
> Ruth Hoffman a écrit :
>> +1
>> Thank you BJ.
>> Ruth
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>> [hidden email]
>>
>> BJ Freeman wrote:
>>> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
>>> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?
>>>
>>> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
>>> really understand the design goals of ofbiz.
>>>
>>> =======================
>>>
>>> BJ Freeman
>>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
>>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation
>>> <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
>>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>>>
>>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>>>
>>> Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man
>>> Linkedin
>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [hidden email] sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
>>>
>>>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
>>>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There
>>>> are
>>>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ project
>>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", "Spring",
>>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
>>>>
>>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
>>>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
>>>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity
>>>> definition
>>>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind of
>>>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
>>>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
>>>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the integration.
>>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
>>>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar with
>>>> OFBIZ already will use it.
>>>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
>>>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability,
>>>> while
>>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
>>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
>>>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive
>>>> than
>>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Miles.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi David:
>>>>>
>>>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are
>>>>> many people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value
>>>>> proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>>>>
>>>>> * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>>>> Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>>>> * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>>>> the Entity Engine.
>>>>> * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how
>>>>> to use
>>>>> existing tools).
>>>>> * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>>>> tools).
>>>>>
>>>>> More to come...
>>>>> Ruth
>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
>>>>> "myofbiz"
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>
>>>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz
>>>>>> (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to
>>>>>> see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you
>>>>>> like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table
>>>>>> in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's
>>>>>> use Hibernate!").
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and
>>>>>> it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to
>>>>>> actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the
>>>>>> idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in
>>>>>> the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of
>>>>>> things like this where users and more casual contributors had
>>>>>> ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved
>>>>>> contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I
>>>>>> think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this
>>>>>> mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or
>>>>>> UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to
>>>>>> discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the
>>>>>> "General" thread.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>

Jacques Le Roux

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

Administrator

Sorry Nicolas,

I agree with BJ, I have used both Neogia and OFBiz in many projects and I far prefer the OFBiz way.
One point I did not like in Neogia (maybe it has changed since I always used a version based on R4.0) is the time it takes to
compile, much longer than OFBiz.
Even if I avoid to use Java as most as possible (thanks to Widgets/Groovy and minlilang), depending on projects you have sometimes
to compile more...
Also when you look for strings you get more redundancy because some things are "duplicated" in Neogia part.
But I'm maybe missing things like autocomplete? Not sure it's worth the other costs, though...

Jacques

From: "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]>

> there must be an mis understanding.
> I don't think ofbiz should change just so others people can have it
> easier, at the expense of the ofbiz design.
>
> btw I have been using ofbiz about as long as you.
> I started with java OO and found that I was touching to many points in code.
> Ofbiz design provided a lot less touch points to accomplish the same
> thing. thus has a faster to market design time and less maintainence, IMHO.
>
> ======================
> BJ Freeman
> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>
> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>
> Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man
> Linkedin
> <http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>
>
>
> Nicolas Malin sent the following on 3/11/2010 12:34 PM:
>> -1
>>
>> BJ, Ruth,
>>
>> Saying that OFBiz should move in the same way that other projects is a
>> bit stupid, and show that you've not fully understand OFBiz and the
>> entity engine.
>> It is now 7 years I'm working on OFBiz, and I have made the same error
>> at the beginning as others, I did'nt understood at the moment the beauty
>> of the entityengine.
>> Looking back at my hard start, I'm glad having done this error, and now
>> more than mastering the entity engine, and all its abilities in tems of
>> connections, abstractions, and more.
>> The only fault I found was on huge customers projects where there were
>> big business needs.
>>
>> At LibrenBerry and Nereide, we've then added generators to fill the gap,
>> and this remove nothing from the entity-engine capabilities, but add
>> more smoothness in its use. The combination form/screen/minilang is as
>> strong as before and more stronger. For big business needs, where java
>> is needed, the generated code is more reliable (who never has made on
>> error on Strings ?). for an example, you can take a look to neogia
>> accounting code, to see how entity-engine and code generation
>> combination is valuable.
>>
>> From our side, it is sure that helping development by generation is not
>> revolutionizing OFBiz, and should not do it, noone told to replace
>> entity-engine with hibernate.
>> Generation is adding a bigger flexibility and a more reliable product.
>>
>> From my point of view, OFBiz is more than just an ERP. It is also a
>> strong base for any project, from the small ones to the big ones. Adding
>> MDA tools in its data model can only be a good thing.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Nicolas
>>
>> Ruth Hoffman a écrit :
>>> +1
>>> Thank you BJ.
>>> Ruth
>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>>> [hidden email]
>>>
>>> BJ Freeman wrote:
>>>> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
>>>> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?
>>>>
>>>> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
>>>> really understand the design goals of ofbiz.
>>>>
>>>> =======================
>>>>
>>>> BJ Freeman
>>>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
>>>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation
>>>> <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
>>>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>>>>
>>>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>>>>
>>>> Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man
>>>> Linkedin
>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [hidden email] sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
>>>>
>>>>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
>>>>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There
>>>>> are
>>>>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ project
>>>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", "Spring",
>>>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
>>>>>
>>>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
>>>>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
>>>>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity
>>>>> definition
>>>>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind of
>>>>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
>>>>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
>>>>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the integration.
>>>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
>>>>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar with
>>>>> OFBIZ already will use it.
>>>>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
>>>>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability,
>>>>> while
>>>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
>>>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
>>>>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive
>>>>> than
>>>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Miles.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi David:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are
>>>>>> many people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value
>>>>>> proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>>>>> Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>>>>> * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>>>>> the Entity Engine.
>>>>>> * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how
>>>>>> to use
>>>>>> existing tools).
>>>>>> * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>>>>> tools).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> More to come...
>>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
>>>>>> "myofbiz"
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz
>>>>>>> (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to
>>>>>>> see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you
>>>>>>> like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table
>>>>>>> in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's
>>>>>>> use Hibernate!").
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and
>>>>>>> it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to
>>>>>>> actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the
>>>>>>> idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in
>>>>>>> the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of
>>>>>>> things like this where users and more casual contributors had
>>>>>>> ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved
>>>>>>> contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I
>>>>>>> think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this
>>>>>>> mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or
>>>>>>> UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to
>>>>>>> discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the
>>>>>>> "General" thread.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>
>