What's the difference between servicemix-cxf-bc and servicemix-http, servicemix-JMS

[Jackey Ding <no...@gmail.com>]

Servicemix-http ships with a JBI compliant HTTP/SOAP binding component,
Servicemix-JMS ships with a JBI compliant HTTP/SOAP binding component and
servicemix-cxf-bc ships with a JBI compliant HTTP/SOAP or JMS/SOAP binding
component. Any difference between them?

Re: What's the difference between servicemix-cxf-bc and servicemix-http, servicemix-JMS

[mattrpav <ma...@airband.com>]

A clarification.. regarding cxf-se.. i said 'plain java beans', but I meant
to make the distinction between Java beans that are representative of the
object defined in the XML schema (like JAXB beans), and not a JBI-related
object.

Matt Pavlovich
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/What%27s-the-difference-between-servicemix-cxf-bc-and-servicemix-http%2C-servicemix-JMS-tp16347193s12049p16351017.html
Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: What's the difference between servicemix-cxf-bc and servicemix-http, servicemix-JMS

[mattrpav <ma...@airband.com>]

Hi Jackey-

servicemix-http passes the message to another JBI compliant SU in the form
of a MessageExchange, so you would be working with the message in a raw XML
format.  Something like sm-http -> sm-bean -- the bean would have to pull
the message out of the exchange object as a raw xml string before working
with it.  It is also handy for tying to other out-of-the-box components. 

servicemix-cxf-bc is generally paired with the servicemix-cxf-se, and the
cxf-se engine automatically processes the message, converts to the plain
java beans as defined by the XML Schema and passes them into the Impl class
that implements all the methods as defined by the operations in the WSDL. 
This is handy for the straight web service <-> database type service where
you just want to expose an API for objects in a database.  

Haven't worked with servicemix-jms, but I imagine that it just sticks the
message on a queue or topic for you, so there is no coding required.

The idea of having all three is to provide flexibility and maximum
integration capability with as little effort as possible.  For example, if
you had an existing JMS implementation, you would want to use servicemix-jms
to expose services as a Web Service.  Also, you have a WS exposed and need
to transform the message to send to another web service, you could do a
sm-http (consumer: inbound message) -> sm-saxon (XSLT transform) -> sm-http
(provider: send to other web service) and not have to write a single line of
Java code.

Matt Pavlovich
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/What%27s-the-difference-between-servicemix-cxf-bc-and-servicemix-http%2C-servicemix-JMS-tp16347193s12049p16351011.html
Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: What's the difference between servicemix-cxf-bc and servicemix-http, servicemix-JMS

[Jackey Ding <no...@gmail.com>]

Thanks for your reply.
It makes me more clearly about these stuff.

Jackey


2008/3/28, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>:
>
> If you are interested in SOAP handling (either through HTTP or JMS), I
> would
> recommend using servicemix-cxf-bc.   The two other BC (servicemix-http and
> servicemix-jms) are more powerful wrt to transport itself, but less wrt
> soap, and the servicemix-cxf-bc component would have a more hard time to
> handle non soap messages.
>
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 8:41 AM, Jackey Ding <no...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Servicemix-http ships with a JBI compliant HTTP/SOAP binding component,
> > Servicemix-JMS ships with a JBI compliant HTTP/SOAP binding component
> and
> > servicemix-cxf-bc ships with a JBI compliant HTTP/SOAP or JMS/SOAP
> binding
> > component. Any difference between them?
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>

Re: What's the difference between servicemix-cxf-bc and servicemix-http, servicemix-JMS

[Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>]

If you are interested in SOAP handling (either through HTTP or JMS), I would
recommend using servicemix-cxf-bc.   The two other BC (servicemix-http and
servicemix-jms) are more powerful wrt to transport itself, but less wrt
soap, and the servicemix-cxf-bc component would have a more hard time to
handle non soap messages.

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 8:41 AM, Jackey Ding <no...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Servicemix-http ships with a JBI compliant HTTP/SOAP binding component,
> Servicemix-JMS ships with a JBI compliant HTTP/SOAP binding component and
> servicemix-cxf-bc ships with a JBI compliant HTTP/SOAP or JMS/SOAP binding
> component. Any difference between them?
>



-- 
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/