Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news.new-york.net!ritz.mordor.com!jpletzke
From: jpletzke@ritz.mordor.com (Jonathan Pletzke)
Subject: [all] Transaction vs. Object Oriented
X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 950824BETA PL0]
Lines: 22
Organization: Mordor International
Message-ID: <DLp0wr.16o@ritz.mordor.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 16:10:02 GMT

Does anyone have thoughts or opinions about the difference or transition 
between Transaction and Object Oriented?

Specifically, when working with a transaction oriented system (such as 
IBM's CICS on MVS) where all the philosophy and design is based on 
"transactions" how should the Smalltalk system interface.

I know that we have object brokers, etc., but find that the only way to 
satisfy the mainframe needs for low CPU and high security is to end up 
with a CICS/COBOL interface to data (whether it be DB2, IMS, IDMS, VSAM 
etc.) which is transaction oriented.  Every product that serves this need 
does not provide adequate security (i.e. RACF authorization and 
authentication) for the Mainframe security people.

If a strategy can be devised, there is a significant market for a product 
that satisfies the needs.  Without exploring the needs too deeply, I can 
state that each file and user profile is typically controlled by the 
security department and access by the DBAs to that information is 
unacceptable.

-Jonathan

