最佳实践 - 实体本身内的Hibernate持久性代码？ [英] Best Practices -- Hibernate persistence code inside the Entity itself?

问题描述

在Google的 RequestFactory 教程中，他们建议将我的持久性逻辑（在本例中为Hibernate）放入Entity类中。然后他们提出了这样一个问题：如果你不想在一个实体中实现持久化代码呢？并继续解释另一种方法。

我的问题：哪种更好，将持久性逻辑放在Entity类中，还是将所有持久性逻辑放在单独的类中？ p>

感谢任何信息。

-tjw

将持久性代码放入实体本身是一种活动记录模式方法，同时将所有持久性逻辑保存在单独的类中是 Repository Pattern 方法。您可以使用关键字存储库模式与activerecord 来搜索有关您的问题的更多信息。 例如，活动记录模式在没有数据库的情况下对其可测试性提出批评，您可以参考这个获取更多信息。

对我来说，我更喜欢Repository Pattern，因为它是可测试的，我不喜欢持久性代码和domian业务逻辑混合在一个类中这违反了关注分离的重点。

In Google's RequestFactory tutorials, they recommend putting my persistence logic (in my case, Hibernate) inside the Entity classes. Then they pose the question: "What if you don't want to implement persistence code in an entity itself?" and proceed to explain an alternate method.

My question: which is better, putting persistence logic inside the Entity class, or keeping all persistence logic in a separate class?

Any info is appreciated, thanks.

-tjw

解决方案

Putting the persistence code in an entity itself is an Active Record Pattern approach while keeping all persistence logic in a separate class is the Repository Pattern approach. You can use the keyword repository pattern vs activerecord to search more information about your questions.

For example ,active record pattern has a criticism about its testability without a database , you can refer to this for more info .

For me , I prefer the Repository Pattern more as it is testable and I don't like persistence codes and domian business logic are mixed in one class which violates the emphasis on separation of concerns.

这篇关于最佳实践 - 实体本身内的Hibernate持久性代码？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！