Tad~

Thanks very much for taking the time to write this thoughtful reply.

Thanks for the portability guildelines about stateless session EJBs,
servlets and JSPs, JDBC, RMI over IIOP, and JMS. I will pay attention
to these.

~akb


On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 10:36:29 -0500, Tad Stephens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Kevin,
> 
> I'm sure folks from some of the other application server vendors will
> answer with a similar response but here is my experience over the years.
> Basically, while it is possible to write J2EE applications that are
> portable between the various containers, the level of "portability" is
> impacted by a number of factors.  Following some basic "lowest common
> denominators" you can write applications that are portable between the
> various application servers.
> 
> What I've found over the years is that your business logic should be
> almost completely portable, while the interfaces into the underlying
> J2EE services will range from completely portable to basically custom.
> Things are much better today than they were back in 1997 when many of us
> started down this path.  If you stick with stateless session EJBs,
> servlets and JSPs, JDBC, RMI over IIOP, and JMS you're going to have an
> application that is very portable between the various J2EE compliant
> application servers.  There may be a few areas that are specific to each
> application server, such as deployment descriptor formats, but the basic
> API support will be consistent.
> 
> The areas of J2EE where you are likely to encounter portability problems
> are stateful services, especially CMP and entity beans, Java 2 connector
> services, and "advanced" features such as clustering and administration.
> Most of the basic interfaces into CMP are consistent across containers
> but the way those interfaces are implemented can be quite unique from
> server to server.  Advanced features like clustering and administration
> won't affect your application at the API level, meaning the application
> can be ported between containers.  For example, support for JMX ranges
> from extensive in some of the application servers to almost
> non-existent.  However, these features are mostly outside the scope of
> J2EE compatibility and where vendors differentiate their products.  The
> cool thing is it allows you to move between the application servers
> until you find the one that matches your availability, reliability, and
> scalability needs, without requiring extensive rewrites.  With support
> for things like extended free downloads, comparing multiple application
> servers is even easier.
> 
> I have worked with customers who, for example, develop on one vendor's
> application server and deploy on a different platform.  While this does
> add significant cost to the development effort - you have to maintain
> two environments, separate scripting and administration, etc. - it is
> possible and relatively straightforward to follow this approach if it
> meets your needs.
> 
> Let me know if you have any additional questions.  Of course, I'd love
> to see BEA added to your list ;-) but I'm all about seeing J2EE
> proliferate, even if it is with the other guys.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of A. Kevin Baynes
> Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2005 3:20 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [Juglist] Application Servers
> 
> In theory, one should be able to create an application that is
> portable between application servers, correct? In practice, how
> difficult is this?
> 
> The company I work for has relationships with IBM and JBoss. I'm
> rewriting a webapp to take advantage of services offered by an
> application server and I would like to support WebSphere, JBoss, and
> Sun. Is this a practical goal?
> 
> Also, our default distribution will probably be bundled inside of
> either JBoss or Sun, since they are freely redistributable. Is there
> any 'big' advantage to using either one?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> ~akb
> 
> -----------------------------
> A. Kevin Baynes
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Juglist mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://trijug.org/mailman/listinfo/juglist_trijug.org
> 
> 


-- 
~akb

-----------------------------
A. Kevin Baynes

_______________________________________________
Juglist mailing list
[email protected]
http://trijug.org/mailman/listinfo/juglist_trijug.org

Reply via email to