The similarity is that with both you can persist a class in a DB.
EJBs are supposed to be components, in the sense that they're not just one class, but a set of classes, descriptors (thats anXML and/or annotations in EJB 3) and usage and management contracts. All of this in order to allow a container (JBoss,Weblogic, etc.) to provide services to those components, and to be able to reuse and distribute this components.
This
services are, among others, transactions, concurrent access control, security, instance pooling, etcetera.
Hibernat is "just" an ORM (Object/Relational Mapping) tool. Quick and dirty, this means you can store an object tree belonging to an class hierarchy in a relational DB without writing a single SQL query. Quite cool, IMO. But no transaction control, no instance pooling, no concurrency control, and certainly no security.
It states that the EJB expert group has decided to use Hibernate as the persistence mechanism in EJB 3.0.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment