So you suggest to use simple fields as properties? Makes sense. We could
stay in same DataObject interface as now. Then read/writeProperty methods
would work through reflection.. I agree this will make classes more
POJO-like
2009/11/19 Andrus Adamchik <andru..bjectstyle.org>
> Actually with Hessian it may be only marginally larger with HashMap (IIRC
> how it does map serialization). With Java serialization it will be
> significantly larger, as it likely serializes all the hash bucket structure.
>
> In any event, like I said in another thread, if we are to reconcile the
> object structures between ROP and regular Cayenne, I'd rather we move closer
> to POJO instead of away from it (with important exception being support for
> generic objects). POJO's take less memory, have no threading issues and are
> generally easier to understand by the users.
>
> Andrus
>
>
>
> On Nov 19, 2009, at 11:10 AM, Andrey Razumovsky wrote:
>
>> We wanted lighter POJO on the client.
>>>
>>>
>>> Are you sure serialization speed/size for Hessian/java serialization
>> will be
>> better for class with 10 attributes than class with one HashMap attribute,
>> *probably* containing those attributes? (and why?)
>>
>
>
-- Andrey
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu Nov 19 2009 - 05:26:59 EST