On Thu, 2002-01-31 at 08:37, Santiago Gala wrote: > Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > > >To be fair, WebSphere is probably more troublesome then the other > >containers (at least thats been my experience with it). I do think > >there is a time and place for RPC. I however think better support for > >location independence is required. > > > (snip) > > > > >I would suggest gaining experience with other containers (BEA and jBoss > >for starters, you can download a trial of the former and the latter is > >opensource) so that you can discriminate the problems that are exist in > >WebSphere from those in EJBs as a whole. Not because you want to just > >do "not-ejb" but so that you don't repeat the same mistakes. > > > I have implemented a system using Container Managed EntityBeans that > worked fairly well. I used Jonas (it was some time ago). It was smaller > than the original poster example (about 20 entity classes, tens of > thousands of instances). I spent a lot of time getting the entity design > right. From the original description, it looks like the problems in the > quoted project came from bad system design, more than from EJB > technology as such. >
Right. I'm not saying you CAN'T do a good EJB system. You can also do a good JSP system (which does suck...but what do you expect when Sun takes a page from Microsoft). I'm just saying its not good enough. And Entity beans DO completely suck. Sun obviously knows it to because they keep drastically changing the specs. The idea of EJB is suppose to make things easier and time to deploy faster. I don't think it will EVER do that...nice thought but no pie. > Comments on my experience: > > - The location and engine independence was a true marvel. I was > developing with postgres/linux and deploying under MSSQLServer/NT with > the same source code. Only small diffs in configuration needed. > - Performance was not good, but scalability was. > - Leaving transaction and persistence management to the container proved > good at the end. Want to achieve like 500% performance improvement? Trash your entity beans, write some queries and poof. So you spent a good mount of time kludging EJB, then in the end performance sucks, and I dare predict that scalability is not as good as you think it is. So far even vendor presentations about how they designed apps in such a short time using their new cool tools have failed the all important question: "And just how much hardware did you put behind that?". EJB is pushing the envelope. News flash, programmers are becoming cheaper than E 10000 servers again. ;-) Its cheaper to do a good implementation. Anyhow if you're happy with EJB, then great. I for one would like to see a better and more open vendor-neutral standard. > - My main issue in the development were related with using JSP for the > interface (JSP sucks (c) Jon :) ) > +1 However, know there are some environments where the only thing worse than JSP are the programmers that are using it. Its appropriate for "programmers" who don't know how to program. Its also a bit better than many of the other things in that problem area that were developed around the same time. > So, while I agree with political/licensing issues being of concern, I > would not disqualify EJB as a whole from a technological point of view. > YMMV. > > Like I said. Even if I don't like it, I'll have to work in it. I guess I shouldn't pee in the river from which I drink, but I still think its a very bad standard and poorly designed one. -Andy > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- www.superlinksoftware.com www.sourceforge.net/projects/poi - port of Excel format to java http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4487555.html - fix java generics! The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote. -Ambassador Kosh -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
