All:

My apologies to the list for a broken mouse button and the resulting
spurious email. I've been meaning to get another one...

rhalsey007:

In response to your post, I have a crude prototype of a Jess Web Service
wrapper/engine in the works that is essentially a mapping into the Jess
language. It seems to me that if you are considering a JMS/JESS you may also
consider this approach since SOAP can be sent via JMS and/or other
transports. Of course, your requirements may vary...

There are many ways of creating such a service model and I cannot claim to
have the mapping nor the implementation spot-on but it all seems quite
workable. Comments/suggestions are welcome.

I'll post to the list when I know more.

alan


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of rhalsey007
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 3:45 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: JESS: JESS & EJB (The saga continues)


Hi all,

Well, after much churning with Stateful/Stateless Session Beans (& Entity
Beans) I am  beginning to re-think why I would want to integrate JESS with
EJBs. I finally arrived at the notion of using pure JMS Messaging and having
JESS situated within a client to interact with the message content.
Ironically, two of the most successful projects that I have seen in 15 years
used this architecture.

On the other hand, EJBs seem to have many constraints that preclude the
notion of a "constant service". i.e., JESS providing a state-based
inferencing service for clients. My test for the JESS/EJB integration would
be to use the "pumps/tanks" example found in the JESS code section. The
PropertyChangeSupport seems to throw a BIG monkey wrench into the EJB
machine.

It also seems that many of the EJB constraints are geared towards precluding
the use of multi-threaded code (my opinion).

So, for the future I will direct my attention towards using a JMS/JESS
layered architecture. Obviously, the "pumps/tanks" example will not work as
written but I'm sure some event-based message work-around could be
formulated to achieve the same effect. Surely the message latency cannot be
any worse than the "blocking" of the RMI-based EJBs.

Anyhoo - that is my thought for the day.


--------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list
(use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to