Hi Ant, Yes, we thinking also about Groovy i.e. but very closely coupled (not via WS bindings etc.)
On 10/26/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Do you mean the E4X sample, if so sure but it will take a little while to > get it going again with the latest code. So does that mean JavaScript and > E4X are languages you are interested in using? And how about others like > Ruby or Groovy or what else would you use? > > ...ant > > On 10/26/07, Holger Winkelmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hello Ant, > > > > Thanks for the reply, sounds intersting. We are just in the phase of > > prototype implementations. So if you can commit the sample it would be > > great > > to get some grip on. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Holger > > > > > > On 10/26/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > On 10/26/07, Holger Winkelmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > For a new Software Project we considering SCA and Apache Tuscany as > > > > programming model. The application > > > > has some Performance Numbers already. we expecting about 1000 SOAP > > > > requests > > > > / per second and need > > > > to make Desicins about what to do with the reqests. Teh decissions > > need > > > to > > > > be dynamicly changed by different > > > > implementations i.e. JavaCode, Scripts etc. many of those scripts > can > > be > > > > active at a time. > > > > > > > > We are looking to the interesting SCA programming model where these > > > > Components can be implemented in > > > > different languages. > > > > > > > > Now we are wondering the "SCA Container" will add some Performance > > > > overhead > > > > or not ? So far I understand > > > > for tightly coupled Components there cant be much overhead for > > > > Communication > > > > between the Components ? > > > > > > > > Thanks for any advise, > > > > > > > > Holger > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Holger Winkelmann > > > > > > > > > > Hi Holger, > > > > > > From what you describe Tuscany seems ideal. The runtime has been > > designed > > > specifically to support this type of invocation of components using > > > different implementations types with minimum overhead. I'd be > surprised > > > if > > > you could get significantly better performance by hand crafting your > own > > > custom invocation code and doing that would be a huge effort, > especially > > > when you start trying to support different data representation types > in > > > different implementation types which Tuscany makes very easy to do. > > > > > > For local components using local interfaces the overhead is already > > > minimal > > > though there is still a further optimization possible in some > situations > > > to > > > avoid any proxy code altogether, that should get into a future Tuscany > > > release, we're user focused so if you say you need that the sooner it > > will > > > happen. > > > > > > 1000 SOAP requests per second should be achievable though obviously > > > depends > > > on many factors such as the size of the request. A while back i did > some > > > simple performance testing with Web services and JavaScript components > > > using > > > a custom data binding using the WSO2 Axiom E4X implementation [1] and > > that > > > gave really stellar performance as there is minimal data copying / > > > transformation and you still get all the benefits of JavaScript and > E4X, > > I > > > could get that code committed if it would be of use to you. > > > > > > Can you say a bit more about what you're doing - what languages are > you > > > interested in using etc? > > > > > > ...ant > > > > > > [1] http://www.wso2.org/library/1050 > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Holger Winkelmann > > > -- Holger Winkelmann
