Charles,
Thanks for your response.
BTW having some matrix of features on jBoss site with comparison to other servers
would be very helpful for newcomers
like me.
Jerzy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Crain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "jBoss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2000 2:50 PM
Subject: Re: [jBoss-User] jBoss or Enhydra ?
> First of all, Rickard is right, if all you are looking for is an EJB
> container, you will be talking about JoNaS, the EJB component of Enhydra. I
> have not use all of Enhydra, BUT I have used JoNaS, so I will try to compare
> and contrast here.
>
> First of all, let me just start by saying that having evaluated both, I
> personally chose jBoss for several reasons which I'll go over after my
> (somewhat) unbiased comparison of the two:
>
> JoNaS advantages:
> - decent EJB 1.1 compliance, better than most anyway (such as Allaire JRun).
> There are a few problems, like the ejb-jar.xml file doesn't go in the
> META-INF directory, so you will at least have to re-jar beans from a fully
> compliant server to deploy them on JoNaS.
> - Easy to configure data soucres and set up finder methods for entity beans
> - True distributed transaction management using their own transaction
> server, able to coordinate transactions between different machines
> - Ability to obtain a UserTransaction object from a remote client
> (application client), albeit NOT in the standard J2EE way.
> - Fairly stable
> - Used with Enhydra, you get a JMX (Java Management Extension) enabled
> server that allows easy remote management.
>
> jBoss advantages:
> - Proxy-based deployment!!!! You don't need to generate stubs for your
> beans, that's all done automatically, just copy your beans into the deploy
> directory, and they are automatically hot-deployed.
> - JMX-enabled server with finer grained component architecture than JoNaS.
> Whereas in JoNaS, the whole EJB server is a component of Enhydra, with
> jBoss, the auto deployer, bean container, tx manager, etc. are all
> components.
> - Very good EJB 1.1 compliance
> - Graphical deployment tools allow you to set up data sources, finder
> methods, etc.
> - Rapidly evolving J2EE compliance...for instance, the ability to obtain
> user transactions via the standard J2EE method for in-VM EJB clients is
> either in the works or already there.
> - Actively developed! Reported bugs are typically fixed within a couple
> days, and new features are always popping up. Even EJB 2.0 support is in
> the roadmap.
> - Several advanced features, such as the ability to load classes dynamically
> from clients, so you don't have to put ANY extra jars (apart from the
> standard ejb.jar and the interfaces for your beans) in the client's
> classpath.
> - Takes advantage of several new features in the new (faster, better) JDK
> 1.3
> - Clustering support coming soon! This is a feature typically only seen on
> $10,000+ per CPU servers like WebLogic. And as I understand it the
> slickness of the implementation (Jini-based) will blow WebLogic smooth out
> of the water.
> - good documentation, particularly for a young open source effort
>
> JoNaS disadvantages:
> - Somewhat clunky deployment. You have to generate stubs for your beans
> using a tool called GenIC, edit some configuration files, stop the server
> and run it again every time you re-deploy. Not terrible for deployed
> systems, but a huge pain for development.
> - Everything runs in a separate VM. In fact, all the examples have EACH
> BEAN running in its own server, in its own VM. To run multiple beans in the
> same VM, you have to edit some configuration files.
> - The JNDI provider is our old friend the RMI registry. This has several
> limitations, including the fact that you have to have rmiregistry running
> (presumably in its own VM), and all the classes served up by rmiregistry
> have to be in the rmiregistry's classpath. It also does NOT support
> sub-contexts, so JNDI names like "interest/InterestHome" are impossible.
> - The JoNaS distribution does not ship with a lot of necessary jars, and you
> have to manually download them from java.sun.com, install them, and tell the
> config files where they are.
> - No pooling! Ack! Although several EJB resources (stateless session
> beans, JDBC connections, passivated beans, etc.) are specifically designed
> to be pooled, JoNaS does NOT do this. This means some significant
> performance hits compared to EJB servers that pool (which is just about
> every other one).
>
> jBoss disadvantages:
> - Still somewhat unstable, so if you need rock-solid performance, you'll
> have to wait (and/or help out!)
> - No distributed transactions. Transactions are capable of being propagated
> within the same VM only, not to other VM's on the same machine, and not to
> other machines. Of course, you still have distributed transactions in terms
> of transactional RESOURCES, so for instance you can still run your Oracle
> database(s) on different machines. There is talk on the development group
> about implementing this however.
> - No ability to obtain a UserTransaction from an out-of-VM client
> (application client). This is not mandated by the J2EE specification, and
> clients that rely on this behavior are by definition non-portable, but
> several other EJB containers do provide this service.
>
> In summary, I chose jBoss because of the better standards compliance, the
> ease of bean development, the richer feature set, the better performance
> (mainly due to better JNDI implementation and pooling), and the fact that
> most if not all of the disadvantages I listed above will most likely
> disappear within the next few months.
>
> Hope this helps,
> Charles
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jerzy Brzezicki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "jBoss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2000 9:25 AM
> Subject: [jBoss-User] jBoss or Enhydra ?
>
>
> > I new to EJB and I am not trying to offend anyone here with this question
> so don't flame me :)
> > I just need some infromation from people who have experience with both of
> those servers.
> >
> > Can someone who worked with both servers briefly compare both of them ?
> > I am going to work with apache+tomcat+ some application server (jBoss or
> Enhydra) using VAJ.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jerzy
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
>
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
