1 / 23

Object Relational Mapping

Object Relational Mapping . John M. Miller Perpetual Data Systems. John M. Miller jMiller@pdata.com. Independent Software Architect, Designer & Developer PDC 2002 Speaker Collaborator on adding advanced business rule support to a commercial .Net application framework

jules
Télécharger la présentation

Object Relational Mapping

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Object Relational Mapping John M. Miller Perpetual Data Systems

  2. John M. MillerjMiller@pdata.com • Independent Software Architect, Designer & Developer • PDC 2002 Speaker • Collaborator on adding advanced business rule support to a commercial .Net application framework • Member of a team submitting a response to the OMG request for a method for formalizing business rules • XSLT transformations from ORM conceptual models into .NET entity business object implementation

  3. Overview • What is Object Relational Mapping • Why did Microsoft back away? • Is OR Mapping dead? • What if it isn't? • What does it mean for .NET application architectures? • Which comes first the data chicken or object egg?

  4. What is Object Relational Mapping • Something that persists objects into relational databases • Can be • a software layer using dynamic SQL generation • a method of generating static SQL • Implicit with Domain object models • DataSets need not apply

  5. Why is OR Mapping Important? • Why are domain models important? • Because I said so • They abstract the data access code hiding the database details • They encapsulate the database in an interface that more closely matches the conceptual domain. • Object Models are more expressive for certain kinds of object interactions • Constraints become easier to implement • Object notation is a natural way of navigating a join path ACustomer.Orders[Number=1001].Items[Item=33].Product.Price • Constraints become easier to implement If AProduct.OnHand < AItem.Quantity Then raise BizRuleXceptn

  6. Mappers • Domain models put the responsibility of reconciling design differences between the object and data models on the persistence layer • Persistence Layers • Static • Hand coded • Generated • Dynamic

  7. Problems with OR Mapping • A weakness in the mapper limits the capability of the object model and in turn the capability of the application • No standard object query language • It can’t be done, not practical, a waste of time, etc. • It costs time and money • The dread impedance mismatch Wikipedia, C2

  8. The Impedance Mismatch "When you notice that you're experiencing considerable pain, and you recognize that a substantial amount of the pain occurs in and around the interface between your code and the relational database, then you've found the Object/Relational Impedance Mismatch."

  9. The Impedance Mismatch • Technical • Object Modeling and Data Modeling model fundamentally different things • Objects = Process • Data persistence is secondary • Data = Structure • What about static class diagrams? • Fundamentally flawed for complex structural modeling • Different Optimizations • Identification schemes are a problem

  10. The Impedance Mismatch • Cultural • Created by different camps • Software Architects • The equally dread Database Administrator • Night & Day, Oil & Water, Pickles & Ketchup

  11. The Impedance Mismatch • Reality • Neither domain models nor relational databases are going away. • Mappers are the price we pay for playing • Does it really exist?

  12. So why did Microsoft back away? • ObjectSpaces • Billed as the Microsoft OR Mapper • Due to ship with Visual Studio 2005 • Rolled into WinFS • Because • Overlapped with some of the WinFS persistence story • Different APIs and Microsoft wanted to unify the APIs • Microsoft didn’t want to publish ObjectSpaces and then release an incompatible WinFS

  13. So why did Microsoft back away? • WinFS • Windows object store • Due to ship with Longhorn • Pushed back until after Longhorn • Because • It wasn’t going to be ready in time • Object Persistence is harder than they thought • E12

  14. So why did Microsoft back away? • To the net effect of leaving the market without a Microsoft OR Mapper until? 2008? 2009? 2010? • After first creating a buzz with the initial previews of ObjectSpaces and generating significant market momentum • Leaving the development world to wonder • Is OR Mapping dead?

  15. Is OR Mapping Dead? • In the Microsoft community • Almost • There are several implementations that were available before ObjectSpaces that are still around • And a few created since • One that emulates the ObjectSpaces preview API • In the Java community • Not even close • Widely adopted • Not if, but which one

  16. What if it isn't? • You could miss out on a technology that could make an application easier to design, implement and maintain • What is the .NET OR faithful to do? • Wait for Microsoft • Adopt an existing .NET OR Mapper until Microsoft does something • Try WORM • Adopt an existing .NET OR Mapper permanently • nHibernate is hot right now • Switch to Java • Like you, they get OR mappers

  17. What does it mean for .NET application architectures? • XML and DataSets will continue to rule the DAL world until a dominate OR mapper for .NET appears • OR Mapping will continue to be used sparingly and grow as the mappers mature • Adoption rate in the .NET community should mimic the adoption rate for OR mappers in the Java community, but at faster pace • Should be widely adopted in the .NET community in 3-4 years • Hold your breath when WinFS ships

  18. Which comes first the data chicken or object egg? • Lets say you are starting a new project with: • Complex business logic • Complex data relationships • Interested in creating a domain model and and relational database. • What do you do first? • Call me • Create the object model you want to persist • Create the data model that you know you need • If you do either 2 or 3 you have to deal with the dread impedance mismatch

  19. The Object Egg • You create the domain object model first using standard OOA&D methods • Then derive the data structure from the object model • Problems • Number of tables • Normalization • Fragile Structures

  20. The Data Chicken • You create the data model first using standard data modeling methods • The derive the domain model from the data model • Problems • You tell me? • Fidelity Loss

  21. What then? • Conceptual Models • Design the structures conceptually first using a formal conceptual modeling method • Derive both the entity object model and data model from the conceptual model • Problems • Your domain object model needs to collaborate with the entity objects • No standards • Complex transformation

  22. What next? • 2/1/2005 - San Diego .NET Developer Group Meeting • Implementing .NET Applications using Conceptual Models

  23. Thank You! • jMiller@pdata.com • pdata.com/jMM • shrinkster.com/3bt • en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-relational_mapping • c2.com/cgi/wiki?ObjectRelationalMapping • theserverside.com/books/review/HibernateReview.tss • devx.com/vb2themax/Article/19894 • sddotnetdg.org/Events/SDDOTNET+Meetings/default.aspx

More Related