You could have a single box with.
1) JRun
2) One or more CFMX Server instances
3) JMS server (JRun built-in or another)
A batch order entry CF app could send messages to a CF order processing
app via JMS. Both CF apps could be on the same (or another) CFMX
server instance,
In a production environment, having both CF apps on the same box might
well be valid, -- but you would prolly want the JMS server on a
separate box, maybe even in a separate location.
The key to making this work is that the sender and receiver need not be
available at the same time -- the sender only needs to be sure that
once he has sent his messages, they will be processed (eventually) by
the receiver. That is JMS's responsibility -- store & forward (and
much more)
Being able to do this (decouple the data input from the data
processing) will allow the CF Developer to address a larger part of the
total application needs of the enterprise.
In a way, it is analogous to an internal-use-only web service -- with
the additional advantage that the service doesn't need to be available
for me to request (and be assured that I will receive) services.
There are lots of variations:
You could have several CFMX servers accepting batch order entry &
several other servers processing these orders in the sequence they are
entered.
1) You can enter orders even if there is nothing available to process
them
2) You can process orders even if there is nothing available to enter
them.
Certainly, you could write your own CFMs and CFCs & do all this
yourself -- but it is a lot easier if you let JMS do the heavy lifting.
Dick
On Aug 15, 2004, at 10:31 PM, Samuel R. Neff wrote:
> ok, that's the key information I wasn't clear on.. different systems..
> :-)
>
> Thanks!
>
> Sam
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Sean Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 1:03 AM
> > To: CF-Talk
> > Subject: Re: OpenJMS was JMS provider in anticipation of Blackstone
> >
> > On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 00:42:27 -0400, Samuel R. Neff
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > What's the advantage of tapping into JMS as opposed to
> > using async cfc calls
> > > for a pure CF application?
> >
> > If you have a pure CF app, JMS is irrelevant. JMS is useful for
> > passing data asynchronously between applications on different
> systems.
> >
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
