[infinispan-dev] JPA Store -> Hibernate Store?

[Sanne Grinovero]

+1 on b without renaming.

The fact that we're using Hibernate is an implementation detail, I
think we should focus on the user contract: the end user is supposed
to provide annotated entities.

The user is free to use JPA annotations only in his mapping, so I
think the name is not too bad.
Still in practice the user is also free to use Hibernate specific
annotations, but you have this same liberty when deploying a JPA based
application in an pplication server: we don't strictly ban their
usage, but that doesn't imply a name change either.

Sanne


On 30 January 2014 10:29, Radim Vansa <rvansa at redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as I am upgrading the JPA Store to work with Infinispan 6.0 SPI, there
> have been several ideas/recommendations to use Hibernate-specific API
> [1][2]. Currently, the code uses javax.persistence.* stuff only
> (although it uses on hibernate implemenation).
>
> What do you think, should we:
> a) stay with javax.persistence only
> b) use hibernate API, if it offers better performance / gets rid of some
> problems -> should we then rename the store to
> infinispan-persistence-hibernate? Or is the Hibernate API an
> implementation detail?
> c) provide performant (hibernate) and standard implementation?
>
> My guess is b) (without renaming) as the main idea should be that we can
> store JPA objects into relational DB
>
> Radim
>
> [1] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3953
> [2] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-3954
>
> --
> Radim Vansa <rvansa at redhat.com>
> JBoss DataGrid QA
>
> _______________________________________________
> infinispan-dev mailing list
> infinispan-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev