Re: [teiid-dev] Proposal to further refine the JCA Connectors

On Thu, 2010-04-29 at 14:24 -0400, John Doyle wrote: > In general I get the reasons for this change, and think it's on whole a positive shift, but want to drill down into some areas. > > https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/TEIID-1077 defines the split into translation/connection for individual connectors, and leaves some of them TBD but states that some will not be JCA for the connection. > > Q: Are we 'enforcing' the division of these components through the APIs we're offering, We define the "translator-api" aka "connector-api". We do not define the semantics of the connections . Either they are defined already like javax.sql.DataSource or defined by the user. > or are we introducing a design pattern for connectors such that if you have a JCA connector for source X, you can just write a translator for Teiid. We are finally separating the concerns, into their areas. yes, you are right. If there is JCA connector, Teiid would require them to just write the translator and use the JCA connector. If there is a translator defined already that understands the connection interaction then they could use that. > LDAP seems amenable for the design pattern case; I don't know that they are available or good but there are hits for LDAP-JCA connector. This is simplest case; I will look it up. > For the TBD sources, and forthcoming connectors, > is the connector writer free ti implement the connection as they choose, or are we establishing some kind of Connection API that the translation layer will use and that must also be implemented? Yes, the developer should be free in defining the connection semantics, however then he/she needs to have translator that understands it. By default, we could still provide current connection semantics that we already have if somebody wants to use them. for XML connectors, we are seeking out help from JBoss Web services team on the connection semantics, so that we can re-use any work they may have. > > Also, as part of the embedded Teiid for Designer which results from this change, This is entirely separate discussion. The decision to use "embedded" or server is still pending upon discussion. however I will try to answer your questions in separate email. Ramesh..