Home » Eclipse Projects » DTP » Reverse engineering
|
| Re: Reverse engineering, WTP [message #282 is a reply to message #272] |
Tue, 10 May 2005 17:45   |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: christian.sell.netcologne.de
Hi Alejandro (and others),
have you looked at the database tooling in the WTP project? It is quite
extensive, also covering reverse engineering (via JDBC and, I think,
from an SQL script). I think it will be unified with this project.
I must say, however, that I dont like the design very much. I tried to
add an extension for Postgresql, and it was quite a mess. I also really
wonder what the benefit of modeling the base layer with EMF is..
Alejandro Narancio wrote:
> Hi for everyone.
> I work a lot of time in database reverse engineering, I can help in this
> subject if anybody thing this is useful (I think there is a lot).
> We can make reverse engineering direct from the catalog of the database
> or from a SQL Script.
>
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Reverse engineering, WTP [message #290 is a reply to message #282] |
Wed, 11 May 2005 00:58 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: john.graham.sybase.com
Hi Alejandro and Christian,
Yes, the rdb tools currently in WTP will be consolidated into DTP. I don't
know the particulars about the reverse engineering case discussed below, but
I will pass this information along. Perhaps we can get a discussion about
reverse engineering requirements and contributions going in this thread,
since I think DTP would benefit greatly from solid functionality in this
area.
Regards,
John Graham
john.graham@sybase.com
Eclipse DTP
"Christian Sell" <christian.sell@netcologne.de> wrote in message
news:d5qsf0$rkp$1@news.eclipse.org...
> Hi Alejandro (and others),
>
> have you looked at the database tooling in the WTP project? It is quite
> extensive, also covering reverse engineering (via JDBC and, I think, from
> an SQL script). I think it will be unified with this project.
>
> I must say, however, that I dont like the design very much. I tried to add
> an extension for Postgresql, and it was quite a mess. I also really wonder
> what the benefit of modeling the base layer with EMF is..
>
> Alejandro Narancio wrote:
>> Hi for everyone.
>> I work a lot of time in database reverse engineering, I can help in this
>> subject if anybody thing this is useful (I think there is a lot).
>> We can make reverse engineering direct from the catalog of the database
>> or from a SQL Script.
>>
>>
|
|
|
| Re: Reverse engineering, WTP [message #299 is a reply to message #282] |
Wed, 11 May 2005 02:05 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: rgreene.versant.com
Hi Guys,
In the DTP consolidation meetings, there were several contributions from
different groups in this area. Ultimately, it was collectively decided that
we would use the model driven approach taken by the WTP. This gives an
abstracted way of dealing with the underlying database through a logical
model allowing consistent access/extension points independent of the chosen
physical model. It was recognized that we need to extend support for more
physical models (databases). Several committers from the ORM project, which
currently supports 15 different databases, will be collaborating with IBM
and others to extend this area.
Cheers,
-Robert
"Christian Sell" <christian.sell@netcologne.de> wrote in message
news:d5qsf0$rkp$1@news.eclipse.org...
> Hi Alejandro (and others),
>
> have you looked at the database tooling in the WTP project? It is quite
> extensive, also covering reverse engineering (via JDBC and, I think,
> from an SQL script). I think it will be unified with this project.
>
> I must say, however, that I dont like the design very much. I tried to
> add an extension for Postgresql, and it was quite a mess. I also really
> wonder what the benefit of modeling the base layer with EMF is..
>
> Alejandro Narancio wrote:
> > Hi for everyone.
> > I work a lot of time in database reverse engineering, I can help in this
> > subject if anybody thing this is useful (I think there is a lot).
> > We can make reverse engineering direct from the catalog of the database
> > or from a SQL Script.
> >
> >
> >
|
|
|
| Re: Reverse engineering, WTP [message #313 is a reply to message #299] |
Wed, 11 May 2005 10:01 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: christian.sell.netcologne.de
Robert Greene wrote:
> In the DTP consolidation meetings, there were several contributions from
> different groups in this area. Ultimately, it was collectively decided that
> we would use the model driven approach taken by the WTP. This gives an
> abstracted way of dealing with the underlying database through a logical
> model allowing consistent access/extension points independent of the chosen
> physical model.
hmm - any development is model-driven, IMO. What EMF introduces is another
intermediate notation/language, and a generation step, of which I dont see
the benefit. I would count it much easier to code the model directly in
Java, and go from there. You can abstract as much in Java as you can in
any other language. To understand the WTP stuff at the model level, you
have to first learn EMF. But I guess this is a vain discussion, so we can
leave it here..
> It was recognized that we need to extend support for more
> physical models (databases). Several committers from the ORM project, which
> currently supports 15 different databases, will be collaborating with IBM
> and others to extend this area.
what ORM project are you referring to? When I look at the newsgroups, I
see jsr220-orm and ejb-orm.
regards,
christian
> Cheers,
> -Robert
> "Christian Sell" <christian.sell@netcologne.de> wrote in message
> news:d5qsf0$rkp$1@news.eclipse.org...
>> Hi Alejandro (and others),
>>
>> have you looked at the database tooling in the WTP project? It is quite
>> extensive, also covering reverse engineering (via JDBC and, I think,
>> from an SQL script). I think it will be unified with this project.
>>
>> I must say, however, that I dont like the design very much. I tried to
>> add an extension for Postgresql, and it was quite a mess. I also really
>> wonder what the benefit of modeling the base layer with EMF is..
>>
>> Alejandro Narancio wrote:
>> > Hi for everyone.
>> > I work a lot of time in database reverse engineering, I can help in this
>> > subject if anybody thing this is useful (I think there is a lot).
>> > We can make reverse engineering direct from the catalog of the database
>> > or from a SQL Script.
>> >
>> >
>> >
|
|
|
| Re: Reverse engineering, WTP [message #331 is a reply to message #313] |
Wed, 11 May 2005 22:35 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: rgreene.versant.com
Hi Christian,
>
> what ORM project are you referring to? When I look at the newsgroups, I
> see jsr220-orm and ejb-orm.
>
It is the jsr220-orm project.
Cheers,
-Robert
|
|
|
| Re: Reverse engineering, WTP [message #336 is a reply to message #313] |
Thu, 12 May 2005 22:19 |
 Stefan Vaillant
Messages: 8
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
I fully support the EMF driven approach because of the following reasons:
We have a domain specifc model, which we map to a relational model. Because
the WTP RDB model has been done by using EMF, defining this mapping is
relatively easy:
1. We define a Rose "mapping model" that connects the related classes from
our domain model to the RDB model.
2. EMF not only generates the Java API, but also the XML/XMI serialisation,
with support for cross file references. Note that support for cross file
references is not trivial to get out-of-the-box with standard XML or JAXB
tools, AFAIK.
So I don't see a (big) disadvantage of using EMF, only an advantage.
Yes, there is a learning curve (as the EMF book has some pages), but JAXB
tools and code conventions to deal with notifications, bidirectional
references, proxies and meta-data also have a learning curve.
* Stefan
PS: I'm not involved in the DTP / WTP project, we are just using EMF and
plan to use DTP once it is stable.
"Christian Sell" <christian.sell@netcologne.de> wrote in message
news:4e685fd370c797b6a7bf041dd0602fdf$1@www.eclipse.org...
> Robert Greene wrote:
>
> > In the DTP consolidation meetings, there were several contributions from
> > different groups in this area. Ultimately, it was collectively decided
that
> > we would use the model driven approach taken by the WTP. This gives an
> > abstracted way of dealing with the underlying database through a logical
> > model allowing consistent access/extension points independent of the
chosen
> > physical model.
>
> hmm - any development is model-driven, IMO. What EMF introduces is another
> intermediate notation/language, and a generation step, of which I dont see
> the benefit. I would count it much easier to code the model directly in
> Java, and go from there. You can abstract as much in Java as you can in
> any other language. To understand the WTP stuff at the model level, you
> have to first learn EMF. But I guess this is a vain discussion, so we can
> leave it here..
>
> > It was recognized that we need to extend support for more
> > physical models (databases). Several committers from the ORM project,
which
> > currently supports 15 different databases, will be collaborating with
IBM
> > and others to extend this area.
>
> what ORM project are you referring to? When I look at the newsgroups, I
> see jsr220-orm and ejb-orm.
>
> regards,
> christian
>
> > Cheers,
> > -Robert
>
> > "Christian Sell" <christian.sell@netcologne.de> wrote in message
> > news:d5qsf0$rkp$1@news.eclipse.org...
> >> Hi Alejandro (and others),
> >>
> >> have you looked at the database tooling in the WTP project? It is quite
> >> extensive, also covering reverse engineering (via JDBC and, I think,
> >> from an SQL script). I think it will be unified with this project.
> >>
> >> I must say, however, that I dont like the design very much. I tried to
> >> add an extension for Postgresql, and it was quite a mess. I also really
> >> wonder what the benefit of modeling the base layer with EMF is..
> >>
> >> Alejandro Narancio wrote:
> >> > Hi for everyone.
> >> > I work a lot of time in database reverse engineering, I can help in
this
> >> > subject if anybody thing this is useful (I think there is a lot).
> >> > We can make reverse engineering direct from the catalog of the
database
> >> > or from a SQL Script.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
>
|
|
|
| Re: Reverse engineering, WTP [message #341 is a reply to message #336] |
Thu, 12 May 2005 22:45 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: christian.sell.netcologne.de
Stefan Vaillant wrote:
> 1. We define a Rose "mapping model" that connects the related classes from
> our domain model to the RDB model.
a few things I dont understand:
- What role does Rose (proprietary UML tool) play here? Or will rose
also be donated as OSS ;-)?
- How do you envision the "connect" part? I dont think Rose (if used)
will support stuff like schema updates and other advanced requirements,
so the benefit of an automated toolset may quickly become questionable.
You may even end up battling the tool to accomodate your requirements.
- what use do you see for "cross file references"? All we are talking
about at the moment is serialization/persisting of a model definition..
regards,
Christian
> 2. EMF not only generates the Java API, but also the XML/XMI serialisation,
> with support for cross file references. Note that support for cross file
> references is not trivial to get out-of-the-box with standard XML or JAXB
> tools, AFAIK.
>
> So I don't see a (big) disadvantage of using EMF, only an advantage.
> Yes, there is a learning curve (as the EMF book has some pages), but JAXB
> tools and code conventions to deal with notifications, bidirectional
> references, proxies and meta-data also have a learning curve.
>
> * Stefan
>
> PS: I'm not involved in the DTP / WTP project, we are just using EMF and
> plan to use DTP once it is stable.
>
> "Christian Sell" <christian.sell@netcologne.de> wrote in message
> news:4e685fd370c797b6a7bf041dd0602fdf$1@www.eclipse.org...
>
>>Robert Greene wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In the DTP consolidation meetings, there were several contributions from
>>>different groups in this area. Ultimately, it was collectively decided
>
> that
>
>>>we would use the model driven approach taken by the WTP. This gives an
>>>abstracted way of dealing with the underlying database through a logical
>>>model allowing consistent access/extension points independent of the
>
> chosen
>
>>>physical model.
>>
>>hmm - any development is model-driven, IMO. What EMF introduces is another
>>intermediate notation/language, and a generation step, of which I dont see
>>the benefit. I would count it much easier to code the model directly in
>>Java, and go from there. You can abstract as much in Java as you can in
>>any other language. To understand the WTP stuff at the model level, you
>>have to first learn EMF. But I guess this is a vain discussion, so we can
>>leave it here..
>>
>>
>>>It was recognized that we need to extend support for more
>>>physical models (databases). Several committers from the ORM project,
>
> which
>
>>>currently supports 15 different databases, will be collaborating with
>
> IBM
>
>>>and others to extend this area.
>>
>>what ORM project are you referring to? When I look at the newsgroups, I
>>see jsr220-orm and ejb-orm.
>>
>>regards,
>>christian
>>
>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>-Robert
>>
>>>"Christian Sell" <christian.sell@netcologne.de> wrote in message
>>>news:d5qsf0$rkp$1@news.eclipse.org...
>>>
>>>>Hi Alejandro (and others),
>>>>
>>>>have you looked at the database tooling in the WTP project? It is quite
>>>>extensive, also covering reverse engineering (via JDBC and, I think,
>>>>from an SQL script). I think it will be unified with this project.
>>>>
>>>>I must say, however, that I dont like the design very much. I tried to
>>>>add an extension for Postgresql, and it was quite a mess. I also really
>>>>wonder what the benefit of modeling the base layer with EMF is..
>>>>
>>>>Alejandro Narancio wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Hi for everyone.
>>>>>I work a lot of time in database reverse engineering, I can help in
>
> this
>
>>>>>subject if anybody thing this is useful (I think there is a lot).
>>>>>We can make reverse engineering direct from the catalog of the
>
> database
>
>>>>>or from a SQL Script.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Reverse engineering, WTP [message #565123 is a reply to message #272] |
Tue, 10 May 2005 17:45 |
Christian Sell
Messages: 77
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Hi Alejandro (and others),
have you looked at the database tooling in the WTP project? It is quite
extensive, also covering reverse engineering (via JDBC and, I think,
from an SQL script). I think it will be unified with this project.
I must say, however, that I dont like the design very much. I tried to
add an extension for Postgresql, and it was quite a mess. I also really
wonder what the benefit of modeling the base layer with EMF is..
Alejandro Narancio wrote:
> Hi for everyone.
> I work a lot of time in database reverse engineering, I can help in this
> subject if anybody thing this is useful (I think there is a lot).
> We can make reverse engineering direct from the catalog of the database
> or from a SQL Script.
>
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Reverse engineering, WTP [message #565148 is a reply to message #282] |
Wed, 11 May 2005 00:58 |
John Graham
Messages: 183
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Alejandro and Christian,
Yes, the rdb tools currently in WTP will be consolidated into DTP. I don't
know the particulars about the reverse engineering case discussed below, but
I will pass this information along. Perhaps we can get a discussion about
reverse engineering requirements and contributions going in this thread,
since I think DTP would benefit greatly from solid functionality in this
area.
Regards,
John Graham
john.graham@sybase.com
Eclipse DTP
"Christian Sell" <christian.sell@netcologne.de> wrote in message
news:d5qsf0$rkp$1@news.eclipse.org...
> Hi Alejandro (and others),
>
> have you looked at the database tooling in the WTP project? It is quite
> extensive, also covering reverse engineering (via JDBC and, I think, from
> an SQL script). I think it will be unified with this project.
>
> I must say, however, that I dont like the design very much. I tried to add
> an extension for Postgresql, and it was quite a mess. I also really wonder
> what the benefit of modeling the base layer with EMF is..
>
> Alejandro Narancio wrote:
>> Hi for everyone.
>> I work a lot of time in database reverse engineering, I can help in this
>> subject if anybody thing this is useful (I think there is a lot).
>> We can make reverse engineering direct from the catalog of the database
>> or from a SQL Script.
>>
>>
|
|
|
| Re: Reverse engineering, WTP [message #565175 is a reply to message #282] |
Wed, 11 May 2005 02:05 |
Robert Greene
Messages: 4
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Hi Guys,
In the DTP consolidation meetings, there were several contributions from
different groups in this area. Ultimately, it was collectively decided that
we would use the model driven approach taken by the WTP. This gives an
abstracted way of dealing with the underlying database through a logical
model allowing consistent access/extension points independent of the chosen
physical model. It was recognized that we need to extend support for more
physical models (databases). Several committers from the ORM project, which
currently supports 15 different databases, will be collaborating with IBM
and others to extend this area.
Cheers,
-Robert
"Christian Sell" <christian.sell@netcologne.de> wrote in message
news:d5qsf0$rkp$1@news.eclipse.org...
> Hi Alejandro (and others),
>
> have you looked at the database tooling in the WTP project? It is quite
> extensive, also covering reverse engineering (via JDBC and, I think,
> from an SQL script). I think it will be unified with this project.
>
> I must say, however, that I dont like the design very much. I tried to
> add an extension for Postgresql, and it was quite a mess. I also really
> wonder what the benefit of modeling the base layer with EMF is..
>
> Alejandro Narancio wrote:
> > Hi for everyone.
> > I work a lot of time in database reverse engineering, I can help in this
> > subject if anybody thing this is useful (I think there is a lot).
> > We can make reverse engineering direct from the catalog of the database
> > or from a SQL Script.
> >
> >
> >
|
|
|
| Re: Reverse engineering, WTP [message #565232 is a reply to message #299] |
Wed, 11 May 2005 10:01 |
Christian Sell
Messages: 77
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Robert Greene wrote:
> In the DTP consolidation meetings, there were several contributions from
> different groups in this area. Ultimately, it was collectively decided that
> we would use the model driven approach taken by the WTP. This gives an
> abstracted way of dealing with the underlying database through a logical
> model allowing consistent access/extension points independent of the chosen
> physical model.
hmm - any development is model-driven, IMO. What EMF introduces is another
intermediate notation/language, and a generation step, of which I dont see
the benefit. I would count it much easier to code the model directly in
Java, and go from there. You can abstract as much in Java as you can in
any other language. To understand the WTP stuff at the model level, you
have to first learn EMF. But I guess this is a vain discussion, so we can
leave it here..
> It was recognized that we need to extend support for more
> physical models (databases). Several committers from the ORM project, which
> currently supports 15 different databases, will be collaborating with IBM
> and others to extend this area.
what ORM project are you referring to? When I look at the newsgroups, I
see jsr220-orm and ejb-orm.
regards,
christian
> Cheers,
> -Robert
> "Christian Sell" <christian.sell@netcologne.de> wrote in message
> news:d5qsf0$rkp$1@news.eclipse.org...
>> Hi Alejandro (and others),
>>
>> have you looked at the database tooling in the WTP project? It is quite
>> extensive, also covering reverse engineering (via JDBC and, I think,
>> from an SQL script). I think it will be unified with this project.
>>
>> I must say, however, that I dont like the design very much. I tried to
>> add an extension for Postgresql, and it was quite a mess. I also really
>> wonder what the benefit of modeling the base layer with EMF is..
>>
>> Alejandro Narancio wrote:
>> > Hi for everyone.
>> > I work a lot of time in database reverse engineering, I can help in this
>> > subject if anybody thing this is useful (I think there is a lot).
>> > We can make reverse engineering direct from the catalog of the database
>> > or from a SQL Script.
>> >
>> >
>> >
|
|
| |
| Re: Reverse engineering, WTP [message #565300 is a reply to message #313] |
Thu, 12 May 2005 22:19 |
Stefan Vaillant
Messages: 8
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
I fully support the EMF driven approach because of the following reasons:
We have a domain specifc model, which we map to a relational model. Because
the WTP RDB model has been done by using EMF, defining this mapping is
relatively easy:
1. We define a Rose "mapping model" that connects the related classes from
our domain model to the RDB model.
2. EMF not only generates the Java API, but also the XML/XMI serialisation,
with support for cross file references. Note that support for cross file
references is not trivial to get out-of-the-box with standard XML or JAXB
tools, AFAIK.
So I don't see a (big) disadvantage of using EMF, only an advantage.
Yes, there is a learning curve (as the EMF book has some pages), but JAXB
tools and code conventions to deal with notifications, bidirectional
references, proxies and meta-data also have a learning curve.
* Stefan
PS: I'm not involved in the DTP / WTP project, we are just using EMF and
plan to use DTP once it is stable.
"Christian Sell" <christian.sell@netcologne.de> wrote in message
news:4e685fd370c797b6a7bf041dd0602fdf$1@www.eclipse.org...
> Robert Greene wrote:
>
> > In the DTP consolidation meetings, there were several contributions from
> > different groups in this area. Ultimately, it was collectively decided
that
> > we would use the model driven approach taken by the WTP. This gives an
> > abstracted way of dealing with the underlying database through a logical
> > model allowing consistent access/extension points independent of the
chosen
> > physical model.
>
> hmm - any development is model-driven, IMO. What EMF introduces is another
> intermediate notation/language, and a generation step, of which I dont see
> the benefit. I would count it much easier to code the model directly in
> Java, and go from there. You can abstract as much in Java as you can in
> any other language. To understand the WTP stuff at the model level, you
> have to first learn EMF. But I guess this is a vain discussion, so we can
> leave it here..
>
> > It was recognized that we need to extend support for more
> > physical models (databases). Several committers from the ORM project,
which
> > currently supports 15 different databases, will be collaborating with
IBM
> > and others to extend this area.
>
> what ORM project are you referring to? When I look at the newsgroups, I
> see jsr220-orm and ejb-orm.
>
> regards,
> christian
>
> > Cheers,
> > -Robert
>
> > "Christian Sell" <christian.sell@netcologne.de> wrote in message
> > news:d5qsf0$rkp$1@news.eclipse.org...
> >> Hi Alejandro (and others),
> >>
> >> have you looked at the database tooling in the WTP project? It is quite
> >> extensive, also covering reverse engineering (via JDBC and, I think,
> >> from an SQL script). I think it will be unified with this project.
> >>
> >> I must say, however, that I dont like the design very much. I tried to
> >> add an extension for Postgresql, and it was quite a mess. I also really
> >> wonder what the benefit of modeling the base layer with EMF is..
> >>
> >> Alejandro Narancio wrote:
> >> > Hi for everyone.
> >> > I work a lot of time in database reverse engineering, I can help in
this
> >> > subject if anybody thing this is useful (I think there is a lot).
> >> > We can make reverse engineering direct from the catalog of the
database
> >> > or from a SQL Script.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
>
|
|
|
| Re: Reverse engineering, WTP [message #565348 is a reply to message #336] |
Thu, 12 May 2005 22:45 |
Christian Sell
Messages: 77
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Stefan Vaillant wrote:
> 1. We define a Rose "mapping model" that connects the related classes from
> our domain model to the RDB model.
a few things I dont understand:
- What role does Rose (proprietary UML tool) play here? Or will rose
also be donated as OSS ;-)?
- How do you envision the "connect" part? I dont think Rose (if used)
will support stuff like schema updates and other advanced requirements,
so the benefit of an automated toolset may quickly become questionable.
You may even end up battling the tool to accomodate your requirements.
- what use do you see for "cross file references"? All we are talking
about at the moment is serialization/persisting of a model definition..
regards,
Christian
> 2. EMF not only generates the Java API, but also the XML/XMI serialisation,
> with support for cross file references. Note that support for cross file
> references is not trivial to get out-of-the-box with standard XML or JAXB
> tools, AFAIK.
>
> So I don't see a (big) disadvantage of using EMF, only an advantage.
> Yes, there is a learning curve (as the EMF book has some pages), but JAXB
> tools and code conventions to deal with notifications, bidirectional
> references, proxies and meta-data also have a learning curve.
>
> * Stefan
>
> PS: I'm not involved in the DTP / WTP project, we are just using EMF and
> plan to use DTP once it is stable.
>
> "Christian Sell" <christian.sell@netcologne.de> wrote in message
> news:4e685fd370c797b6a7bf041dd0602fdf$1@www.eclipse.org...
>
>>Robert Greene wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In the DTP consolidation meetings, there were several contributions from
>>>different groups in this area. Ultimately, it was collectively decided
>
> that
>
>>>we would use the model driven approach taken by the WTP. This gives an
>>>abstracted way of dealing with the underlying database through a logical
>>>model allowing consistent access/extension points independent of the
>
> chosen
>
>>>physical model.
>>
>>hmm - any development is model-driven, IMO. What EMF introduces is another
>>intermediate notation/language, and a generation step, of which I dont see
>>the benefit. I would count it much easier to code the model directly in
>>Java, and go from there. You can abstract as much in Java as you can in
>>any other language. To understand the WTP stuff at the model level, you
>>have to first learn EMF. But I guess this is a vain discussion, so we can
>>leave it here..
>>
>>
>>>It was recognized that we need to extend support for more
>>>physical models (databases). Several committers from the ORM project,
>
> which
>
>>>currently supports 15 different databases, will be collaborating with
>
> IBM
>
>>>and others to extend this area.
>>
>>what ORM project are you referring to? When I look at the newsgroups, I
>>see jsr220-orm and ejb-orm.
>>
>>regards,
>>christian
>>
>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>-Robert
>>
>>>"Christian Sell" <christian.sell@netcologne.de> wrote in message
>>>news:d5qsf0$rkp$1@news.eclipse.org...
>>>
>>>>Hi Alejandro (and others),
>>>>
>>>>have you looked at the database tooling in the WTP project? It is quite
>>>>extensive, also covering reverse engineering (via JDBC and, I think,
>>>>from an SQL script). I think it will be unified with this project.
>>>>
>>>>I must say, however, that I dont like the design very much. I tried to
>>>>add an extension for Postgresql, and it was quite a mess. I also really
>>>>wonder what the benefit of modeling the base layer with EMF is..
>>>>
>>>>Alejandro Narancio wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Hi for everyone.
>>>>>I work a lot of time in database reverse engineering, I can help in
>
> this
>
>>>>>subject if anybody thing this is useful (I think there is a lot).
>>>>>We can make reverse engineering direct from the catalog of the
>
> database
>
>>>>>or from a SQL Script.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Apr 27 03:21:11 GMT 2024
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.04541 seconds |
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
