If OpenEJB is to provide just a container implementation, I'm not too sure
I understand how "scalability and fault tolerance" can be guaranteed anyway.
Does the container-server contract say those are the rules? I don't think
so. Which essentially means that any container implentation can be no more
robust/scalable that the server that hosts the container.
And if OpenEJB's aiming at creating another Apache-Tomcat scenario with all
that overhead caused by IPC - well I don't know. Fundamentally, I mean, can
you really talk of notions of scalability, fault tolerance, reliability and
all that jazz within the context of the container system ALONE? Dunno, must
investigate...
In any case at this point in time, when there is a definite lack of
top-quality+cheap+stable J2EE app servers, offering just a container system
leaves most of us stranded. And so JBoss roolz!
One thing really promising about the OpenEJB effort is associated software
like Tyrex etc. Their attitude seems to be - take a bunch of great software
components and put together a great application infrastructure. Really
commendable.
Interestingly, does JBoss (maybe in 3.0) have any plans to be interoperable
with the OpenEJB container. They have (or will soon) have a complete
reference implementation and specs out. Hey, can this be worked out - I
mean, since the JBoss container design is really modular and great. Maybe
most of it can be plugged OUT as well. ;-)
Sandeep Dath
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." --
Arthur C. Clarke
-----Original Message-----
From: jBoss [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 5:35 PM
To: jBoss
Subject: Re: [jBoss-User] Of container designs and other little
queries..
Hi!
sandeep wrote:
> I just came across a few sketchy comments about the OpenEJB archtecture -
> i.e. how both JBoss and OpenEJB both share Rickard's container design. And
> in the case of OpenEJB, "the goal of this project is to develop a
production
> server which people will be able to use for mission critical applications.
> Scalability, fault tolerance, and working supports for entity beans and
CMP
> are top priorities of this effort."
> Q1. Does this sort of (even subtly - you know by stating something, you
> could negate something else) imply that scalability and fault tolerance
are
> not up on the JBoss priority list? More interestingly, won't JBoss support
> "mission-critical applications?"
Of course not. jBoss 2.0 (what we are doing now) will not have
clustering, which is an important scalability featurem, but that will be
done for jBoss 3.0, which we will begin developing in the not so distant
future.
> Q2: From the architectural standpoint, what the difference between
OpenEJB
> and JBoss right about NOW?
I haven't dug too much into the internals of OpenEJB to answer that
fully, but for one they are only providing a container, whereas we want
to provide a whole server. Which IMHO is more practical. In the case of
OpenEJB they need some app server to be built on top of it, or some
existing app server to utilize it. You be the judge on the probabilities
on that to happen.
> Q3: BTW, Is there a document that details Rickard's container design? Or
is
> is another "read the code, its all there" situation?'
This is coming once I finish up my book and dive back into the jBoss
project 100%.
Thanks for the Q's, they were very good!
/Rickard
--
Rickard �berg
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.telkel.com
http://www.jboss.org
http://www.dreambean.com
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
