Stateful session bean is not necessary?

ipozeng Nov 23, 2001 10:28 PM

Hi,friends
I am not very clean about stateful session bean.I feel the java bean is enough to hold session information.
In my application i use
Jsp+JavaBeans+[stateless session bean + BMP Entity Bean].And it does work fine.

BTW,
What suffix is appropriate for a session EJB? i have used the following suffix to name classes:

xxxBean : a JavaBean
xxxCMP ; a container management persistence entity -------------bean
xxxBMP : a bean management persistence entity bean -------------and derived from its corresponding CMP
xxxDAO : a data access object
xxxEJB : a stateless session bean(it is not a good -------------name :( )

Any suggestions are appreciated!

1. Re: Stateful session bean is not necessary?

minamoto Nov 27, 2001 12:45 AM (in response to ipozeng)

When you use a stateful session bean, you can take advantage of EJB features:

1) Session beans are distributed objects
While only servlets/JSPs can access session objects in a web container, normal Java clients can access session beans.
If the EJB server supports RMI-IIOP, even C++ client can access EJBs.

2) Session beans can control transaction demarcation
We can change transactional behavior of the stateful session bean without changing the source.
You just change the ejb-jar.xml. Even if you can implement listAll() method of JavaBeans + UserTransaction,
it will not be flexible like EJB.

3) Stateful session beans can implement SessionSynchronization interface.
It supports usuful callback methods: afterBegin, beforeCompletion and afterCompletion.
You can do something for your application at the end of the transaction.

Miki
Actions