EJB 3.0 Persistence out of a J2EE container

Tutorials Shared by the Internet Community

Advertisements

  Top Tutorials     New Tutorials     Submit     Login     Register  

Tutorial Detail

EJB 3.0 Persistence out of a J2EE container

In this article we will learn how to manage the persistence issues without being tied to use a J2EE application server.
http://www.censnet.it/articles/cap03.htm
  • Total Hits: 18278

  • Average Rating :
    URL RatingURL RatingURL RatingURL RatingURL Rating

  •  

  • Total Votes: 147 votes

  • Category: JAVA/EJB

  • Submitted on: 2008-03-12 10:32:22

  • Submitted By: Devesh Khanna

  • Set as Favorite

Description:

In this article we will learn how to manage the persistence issues without being tied to use a J2EE application server.
We will build a very basic sample application that saves and loads data on a database using an EJB 3.0 persistence implementation.

At present (April 2007) there exist two implementations of the EJB 3.0 persistence specification: the first is Hibernate-based and was adopted by JBoss, while the other is Oracle Toplink, included into the Oracle Application Server OC4J and into the EJB 3.0 Sun Reference Implementation also known as Glassfish Project .
Note that EJB 3.0 persistence specifications are only a part of the EJB 3.0 specifications. They do not deal with Session Beans (stateless or stateful), but only with the Entity Beans.

Well, the good news is that, as long as we need only the EJB 3.0 persistence layer and do not need Session Beans, we can use Hibernate or Toplink implementation (our choice!) just into any Java application, without the need of a J2EE container, not even a web server, just from a plain Java class!    More detail...

Rating Detail

 Stars  Percentage  Total Vote
 One star  Vote LeftVote MiddleVote Right 37.41%  55
 Two starsTwo star  Vote LeftVote MiddleVote Right 10.88%  16
 Three starsThree starsThree stars  Vote LeftVote MiddleVote Right 12.24%  18
 Four starsFour starsFour starsFour stars  Vote LeftVote MiddleVote Right 10.88%  16
 Five starsFive starsFive starsFive starsFive stars  Vote LeftVote MiddleVote Right 28.57%  42

Caste Your Vote

 Rating  Selection  Guidelines
 Poor:     Very disappointing, useless.
 Fair:     Below average, disappointing but not useless.
 Good:     About average in its class.
 Very Good:     Above average for its category.
 Excellent:     One of the best Tutorials in its category.






Advertisements