RE: framework question

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Loyd Goodbar
> 
> ... And that's my philosophy: let the database take care of itself.
RI,
> CC,
> atomic transactions, cascading updates, all these things are designed
to
> let
> the application programmers be more productive. And you can do it
inside
> RPG,
> if you can tolerate SQL transactions.

Or you can do it with programming.  I'm sorry, but it seems like your
application really sucks.  I worked with BPCS for nearly a decade, and I
never heard of it being as FUBAR as your application.  And no the other
side of the coin, if the commitment control isn't done properly, you'll
end up with as bad of results, but you'll have the false sense of
security that everything is alright.

Of course, you're willing to go the whole nine yards with SQL-izing your
system, which I would never do.  But that's a different debate.

Joe

P.S. In case anyone is wondering why I'm even allowing the commitment
control debate to wage here in JAV400-L, it's because of the JDBC/SQL
issue.  If you're going to go JDBC/SQL, commitment control becomes an
issue, and of course with EJB it's mandatory.  So those of you who find
this conversation annoying, please bear with us.