"This server is especially relying on the outstanding container design
developed by Rickard Oberg and used by the EJBoss project.."
is another quote from the same page...
The source? Well, its actually from a mail from Ismael Ghalimi to one of the
(e)jboss mailing lists. Check it out at:
http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/ejboss/ejboss%2001-07-00
And you're right, Richard. It doesn't say anywhere that "Rickard designed
OpenEJB". I'll concede that. ;-)
Personally and IMHO, I would like to see a "configurable environment" for
JBoss where you can "optionally" plug in OpenEJB, if I really wanted a hot
shot container for a production environment instead of the "native" JBoss
container - you know, as sort of a value add. For eg if there's some
advanced clustering features that the OpenEJB container system provides
that's not (yet) in JBoss.
>> "..but I think Salability and fault tolerance are the design goals of any
application server so I won't dispute it..."
I disagree with Richard here.
What about a pure development purpose J2EE server, where I need to just
build my entire system (containing hundreds of beans) and debug it. I do
not think my requirement list contains scalability and fault tolerance. I
think that's one of the best part of Java and EJB technology. You don't have
to necessarily build your application in an environment that mimics the
production enviroment. You can build your beans in a good quality
development environment like JBoss gives you and then move your whole J2EE
application, if necessary, to an top-flight enterprise quality app server.
(That's not to say JBoss won't hit that level sometime soon! With Marc,
Rickard and the rest of the seemingly-on-steroids JBoss team around, its
definitely going to happen!)
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 8:16 PM
To: jBoss
Subject: Re: [jBoss-User] Of container designs and other little
queries..
sandeep wrote:
> Hi,
> 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.
OpenEJB is not Rickard's design. I think we have to give credit where
credit is
due, so here is a little background: The folks at Orion came up with the
idea
of using the JDK 1.3 proxies for Java RMI stubs. Rickard used Orion's idea
to
create the first proof of concept for his jBoss architecture. I thought
that
the real power of the JDK 1.3 proxies was the deligation pattern at the
container, not the stub implementation itself. The pattern allows one
container
to handle all the bean requests concurrently, something that was not fully
realized in the original jBoss proof-of-concept. It was at that time that I
left the jBoss project to start the OpenEJB project, which is based on this
pattern.
Anyway, since that time OpenEJB and jBoss have taken wildly different paths.
I
think we are sometimes inspired by each others work, but to say that OpenEJB
is
Richard's container design is ridiculous. I'm sure Rickard would agree.
> 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."
Not sure where you got this quote, but I think Salability and fault
tolerance
are the design goals of any application server so I won't dispute it.
>
> Q2: From the architectural standpoint, what the difference between
OpenEJB
> and JBoss right about NOW?
OpenEJB is strictly a container system and its community is composed of
application server developers, not business system developer as is the case
with
jBoss. OpenEJB is already been adopted by two proprietary application
servers
as well as the OpenORB CORBA server, so it's proven successful in its role
as a
container system.
I don't think anyone in the jBoss community will use OpenEJB directly
because
its intended for those people that are developing application servers. In
the
future, however, you may end up using OpenEJB and not even know it because
it
will be hidden inside the application server you are using.
OpenEJB gives application server vendors and open source projects instance
EJB
2.0 functionality -- that probably doesn't mean much to you folks but for
application server developers its a real windfall. We focus on just the
container system so we can direct our energies to creating a very powerful
and
fast EJB 2.0 container. Application serves that use OpenEJB can depend on
it
performance and conformance and its community. Application developers that
use
a server built on OpenEJB can be assured that the core container is
reliable,
performant, and behaves as expected.
Ideally, we would like to see jBoss adopt OpenEJB as its container system.
That
way the good folks at jBoss can focus on all the other functionality of a
J2EE
system, while we continue to enhance and support the core EJB 2.0 container.
This is the path that other J2EE vendors and open source J2EE projects are
using
or considering because it makes good business sense.
Thanks,
Richard
--
Richard Monson-Haefel
Author of Enterprise JavaBeans, 2nd Edition
Published by O'Reilly & Associates
http://www.EjbNow.com
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
