Comments on: Prevayler: Hope or Hype?

by: Darwin

Fri, 03 Jun 2005 11:52:01 +0000

Ops! forgat the url pot.forgeahead.hu

by: Darwin

Fri, 03 Jun 2005 11:50:55 +0000

If in memory persistancy of Prevayler type should be done using “Persisted Object Tree” is prefered.

Its the same ram shit idea but gives evan more freedom to the devel when creating is data objects.

Any way thats what i think! Also using none RDBMS for relatinal data is just crazy!

by: Mark Woodman

Mon, 14 Mar 2005 17:57:05 +0000

I agree with the potential for painting yourself in a corner, although I suspect that may be more of a mental corner than a “oh crap, there’s no way we can change our code now” corner. (Especially if you use a DAO layer to protect yourself from persistence details.)

My experience with Prevayler thus far has been how absolutely trivial it is to persist stuff. If I eventually have to toss Prevayler in favor of mapping objects into an RDBMS, I’ll have lost relatively little invested time.

by: kebernet

Sun, 13 Mar 2005 01:58:53 +0000

I have the same problem with Prevayler, though, that I have with Hibernate’s auto-mode: I shouldn’t have to give up SQL access to the database. The thing is, from your perspective all you want to do is persist some objects and get them back later, but that is basically backing yourself into a corner. You never know when you might want to do a report or share that data with a PHP app.