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

[John Doyle]

Thanks for the explanations, I think I'm good with this.

I think we should offering our current connection semantics would be valuable.

~jd 

----- "Ramesh Reddy" <rareddy at redhat.com> wrote:

> 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..