Yes, you squeezed the network layer, you avoided network problems ;) Le 24 mars 2013 18:12, "Bjorn Danielsson" <[email protected]> a écrit :
> Interesting, I went the opposite way, from JMS to @Asynchronous. > > I began using JMS for asynchronous requests that were required > to be transactional and reliable. This worked great during > initial development, first with OpenMQ in GlassFish and then > with ActiveMQ in OpenEJB/TomEE. But when I started testing > ActiveMQ failover configurations under heavy loads, I started > getting lost messages and hung JMS connections. > > So after struggling for a while I ended up rolling my own > persistent queue in SQL, and used @Asynchronous for the request > dispatch. That turned out to solve all of my problems, and the > overall configuration also become notably simpler. > > -- > Bjorn Danielsson > Cuspy Code AB > > > "Howard W. Smith, Jr." <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > >> just to be sure: @Schedule != @Asynchronous > >> > >> > > True/understood. hahaha! > > > > My point is this... since i had issues using @Asynchronous, it is hard > > going back to @Asynchronous since i'm loving AMQ/JMS. :) > > > > I think I heard you and/or others say that JMS is old technology (java ee > > 5), and I know @Asynchronous is java ee 6, so i trust @asynchronous can > do > > the job, but i even heard that @asynchronous is not good to use in JSF or > > servlet (request-based) apps. >
