On 2/1/02 8:57 AM, "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Perhaps the question to ask is how are real sites providing real > scalabilty without resorting to Enterprise JavaBeans? > > Take google.com and yahoo.com for example, > > Yahoo offers a signficant number of remote, multi-user applications like > the ones we would like to provide to our own clients. Are they using > EJBs? If not, what do they use? How can we turn Yahoo's approach into a > toolkit model that other developers can use? Give them a C/C++ compiler? > > Google is offering a single, read-only servvice, but at mind-bending > speed. How does it serve so many users so quickly? Lots and lots of computers? > Again, how can we > package that approach in a way that it accessible to other developers? I think that the two cases are different (Yahoo and Google), and I think (I don't know as I don't work for Google or Yahoo) it comes down to engineering the solution to the problem, and then using existing tools that fit *your* design solution, and building the parts you can't buy. It appears to me that the App server approach is the opposite - "here is your solution, can you bend the problem to fit?" (Like a joke we used to have : "Unix, of course. Now what was the question?") I am working on a rather large-ish, very complicated project that we are going to implement in Java. There are many J2EE technologies that we will take advantage of such as JMS, JNDI, JTA, etc but the whole container approach doesn't have any relevance other than we may be forced to run it to get some of the services as an app client. Dunno. This does bring up an interesting question : could EJBs possibly work for Yahoo? (I bet not...) -- Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] System and Software Consulting Be a giant. Take giant steps. Do giant things... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
