Re: Green field architecture.
From: Ralph.in.NZ_at_googlemail.com <ralph.in.nz_at_googlemail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 06:35:34 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <e9c8aff9-5f84-475f-916e-791c82ffbe95_at_s31g2000yqs.googlegroups.com>
On 13 Jan, 09:28, Frank van Bortel <frank.van.bor..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Ralph.in..._at_googlemail.com wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> > I am involved in designing the architecture for a green field web
> > application. Oracle 11g on the back end, tomcat at the front. No fully
> > fledged apps server in the middle tier. I can't see why the business
> > logic can't be handled by pl/sql in the database, with the
> > functionality exposed to tomcat via stored procedures. It makes sense
> > to me to do the business logic in the database (very close to the
> > data) rather than to drag data back and forth between the apps server
> > and the database. I have investigated all the custom context stuff for
> > dealing with these lightweight database users comming in via
> > connection pools and it all seems to work a treat.
>
> > The Oracle database is so rich in functionality for using web
> > services, messaging etc that I am really struggling to see the point
> > of a J2EE Apps server. Of course portability is one argument, though
> > in my experiance just because your app is completely written in java,
> > doesn't make it portable. Plus we will be really trying to take
> > advantage of oracle specifc functionality, so wont be wanting to port
> > from there anyway.
>
> > Before I went too much further I thought I would run this idea past
> > those on this group, to see if I have missed any obvious problems with
> > this architecture.
>
> > Any comments gratefully recieved.
>
> > Ralph
>
> You are absolutely right: all this application server
> mumbo-jumbo is really just another way of getting
> more hardware to do the job, and disguising the fact
> nobody give a penny about writing efficient, scalable
> code anymore.
>
> I have see many projects with web interfaces that in
> fact did not need java at all.
>
> I do acknowledge the fact, your GUI may be much richer
> with java than with flat html - but that is eye-candy.
> Just look at the disturbance MOS makes. If you
> really, really need full GUI, go back to Forms.
>
> If you want a fast, lean application, stick to pl/sql,
> possibly java, but all in the database, and learn CSS!
>
> I wish you strength in your battles.
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 06:35:34 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <e9c8aff9-5f84-475f-916e-791c82ffbe95_at_s31g2000yqs.googlegroups.com>
On 13 Jan, 09:28, Frank van Bortel <frank.van.bor..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Ralph.in..._at_googlemail.com wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> > I am involved in designing the architecture for a green field web
> > application. Oracle 11g on the back end, tomcat at the front. No fully
> > fledged apps server in the middle tier. I can't see why the business
> > logic can't be handled by pl/sql in the database, with the
> > functionality exposed to tomcat via stored procedures. It makes sense
> > to me to do the business logic in the database (very close to the
> > data) rather than to drag data back and forth between the apps server
> > and the database. I have investigated all the custom context stuff for
> > dealing with these lightweight database users comming in via
> > connection pools and it all seems to work a treat.
>
> > The Oracle database is so rich in functionality for using web
> > services, messaging etc that I am really struggling to see the point
> > of a J2EE Apps server. Of course portability is one argument, though
> > in my experiance just because your app is completely written in java,
> > doesn't make it portable. Plus we will be really trying to take
> > advantage of oracle specifc functionality, so wont be wanting to port
> > from there anyway.
>
> > Before I went too much further I thought I would run this idea past
> > those on this group, to see if I have missed any obvious problems with
> > this architecture.
>
> > Any comments gratefully recieved.
>
> > Ralph
>
> You are absolutely right: all this application server
> mumbo-jumbo is really just another way of getting
> more hardware to do the job, and disguising the fact
> nobody give a penny about writing efficient, scalable
> code anymore.
>
> I have see many projects with web interfaces that in
> fact did not need java at all.
>
> I do acknowledge the fact, your GUI may be much richer
> with java than with flat html - but that is eye-candy.
> Just look at the disturbance MOS makes. If you
> really, really need full GUI, go back to Forms.
>
> If you want a fast, lean application, stick to pl/sql,
> possibly java, but all in the database, and learn CSS!
>
> I wish you strength in your battles.
Thanks to you all for your comments. It seems that I am on the right
lines ...
I haven't heard of the rule manager...I'll take a look.
Cheers
Ralph Received on Wed Jan 13 2010 - 08:35:34 CST