we will put a matrix of jboss features shortly.
We can't compare ourselves to others like that!
(well maybe ;)
marc
|-----Original Message-----
|From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jerzy Brzezicki
|Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2000 1:21 PM
|To: jBoss
|Subject: Re: [jBoss-User] jBoss or Enhydra ?
|
|
|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]
|
|
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
