Well, concerning JMS vs @Asynchronous, there are different fits for different requirements, and your mileage may vary as always. I used JMS to deal with asynchronous processing, because it was the only tool for the purpose in Java EE 5. Then I found a tool in EE 6 that fitted my purpose better. JMS is much more than what I ever needed, and I think that contributed to making it hard for me to get it working exactly the way I wanted.
And actually I do recall having some problem with @Asynchronous stuff also, but Romain fixed that so fast so I no longer remember what it was about! -- Bjorn Danielsson Cuspy Code AB "Howard W. Smith, Jr." <[email protected]> wrote: > That is good to know, thanks for sharing! And you squeezed a bit more > information/details out of Romain... i couldn't squeeze the following line > out of him earlier... lol > >> Yes, you squeezed the network layer, you avoided network problems ;) > > > On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Bjorn Danielsson < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Well, I still have networking between my two (for failover) >> TomEE servers and the SQL service that holds the queue and >> commits the transactions. But I eliminated a middle-man :) >> >> -- >> Bjorn Danielsson >> Cuspy Code AB >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> wrote: >> > 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. >> >> >>
