You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@jakarta.apache.org by James Strachan <ja...@yahoo.co.uk> on 2001/10/31 22:19:33 UTC
[OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
http://msdn.microsoft.com/net/compare/petshop.asp
Its not a very fair comparison (suprise suprise) but from a quick look at
the source code, it seems MS achieve their performance gains by not using
EJBs :-)
I wonder what the figures would look like if the PetStore were implemented
along similar techniques using just regular JavaBeans and JSP...
James
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by Jon Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com>.
on 11/2/01 12:03 PM, "horwat" <Ju...@Sun.com> wrote:
> http://java.sun.com/j2ee/blueprints/learn.html
>From that, I found this:
"Accelerate read-only data access by not using enterprise beans."
<http://java.sun.com/j2ee/blueprints/design_patterns/fast_lane_reader/index.
html>
I love it.
:-)
-jon
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by horwat <Ju...@Sun.com>.
They have:
http://java.sun.com/j2ee/blueprints/learn.html
Justy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Egyhazy" <mw...@virginia.edu>
To: "Jakarta General List" <ge...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 11:59 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
> perhaps sun should make it more clear that petshop is not a benchmark and
is
> instead a multi-faceted example of the possibilities offered by j2ee. i
> suppose they could rework it and create a benchmark out of it...
>
> microsoft is obviously misusing it...and that is possibly what they do
best
> (and are 'doing right'), spread FUD.
>
> matt
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jon Stevens" <jo...@latchkey.com>
> To: <ge...@jakarta.apache.org>
> Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 2:52 AM
> Subject: Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
>
>
> > on 10/31/01 5:41 PM, "horwat" <Ju...@Sun.com> wrote:
> >
> > > The J2EE PetStore application was created as an educational tool to
> showcase
> > > features available in a J2EE architecture. True, it has many more
EJB's
> then
> > > required in a normal application but these EJB's are meant to be
> examples of
> > > how the technology can be used. PetStore shows by example various
design
> > > patterns and is not meant to be a benchmarked application.
> > >
> > > Microsoft is really missing the point in their benchmark. In their
port
> they
> > > don't have a middle tier. They are really missing the meat of the
> > > architecture and essentially have a database accessible through
> webpages. It
> > > is this middle tier, through the use of EJBs, that allows pluggability
> and
> > > reusability of business logic.
> > >
> > > It is quite telling that Microsoft targeted a strawman, non-optimized,
> > > education focused application instead of an official J2EE benchmark
like
> > > ECPerf.
> > >
> > > Justy
> >
> > Why can't anyone learn that providing crummy examples only encourages
> people
> > to create crummy applications? Most of the people out there probably try
> to
> > copy/paste as much code as they can from samples like the PetStore.
People
> > who are even looking at it in the first place are looking at it as the
> 'Sun
> > approved' way of creating applications.
> >
> > If you are really trying to educate people how to use various design
> > patterns, then why not show them the right way in the first place?
> >
> > Am I the only one who sees the hypocrisy in all of this?
> >
> > p.s. Sun's stock price is flying at a whopping 10.84. M$ must be doing
> > something right (at 61.84).
> >
> > -jon
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by horwat <Ju...@Sun.com>.
What MS did was not simply a smaller, easier understand version of PetStore.
They are spreading misinformation by calling what they did "PetStore". It
simply is not.
If MS wanted to genuinely port the application, they would need to implement
the same design patterns and coding strategies which they did not. Now, if
they want to demonstrate their own two-tier application they are free to do
so but making a comparison to PetStore would be obviously unfair.
Justy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Stevens" <jo...@latchkey.com>
To: <ge...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 12:13 AM
Subject: Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
> on 11/1/01 11:59 PM, "Matt Egyhazy" <mw...@virginia.edu> wrote:
>
> > perhaps sun should make it more clear that petshop is not a benchmark
and is
> > instead a multi-faceted example of the possibilities offered by j2ee. i
> > suppose they could rework it and create a benchmark out of it...
> >
> > microsoft is obviously misusing it...and that is possibly what they do
best
> > (and are 'doing right'), spread FUD.
> >
> > matt
>
> I don't get it though. Why shouldn't a fully functional demo also be able
to
> be used as a real application (or the basis for one)? A pet store shopping
> cart isn't rocket science. Even if it is just an educational science
> project, why does it have to be that much more complex and overly done
than
> an equivalent application in another language/system/os.
>
> The point being is that M$ claims that their version of PetStore is that
> much smaller and easier to understand. Well, if their version also has all
> of the same showcase of features, then how come it is still that much
> smaller/simpler/faster?
>
> I don't really see what M$ did as being FUD. What they are doing is
showing
> the hypocrisy of Sun's marketing engine and the technologies that Sun is
> pushing on people to use.
>
> W a k e u p p e o p l e
>
> -jon
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by James Strachan <ja...@yahoo.co.uk>.
From: "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@optonline.net>
> On 11/2/01 3:13 AM, "Jon Stevens" <jo...@latchkey.com> wrote:
>
> > on 11/1/01 11:59 PM, "Matt Egyhazy" <mw...@virginia.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> perhaps sun should make it more clear that petshop is not a benchmark
and is
> >> instead a multi-faceted example of the possibilities offered by j2ee.
i
> >> suppose they could rework it and create a benchmark out of it...
> >>
> >> microsoft is obviously misusing it...and that is possibly what they do
best
> >> (and are 'doing right'), spread FUD.
> >>
> >> matt
> >
> > I don't get it though. Why shouldn't a fully functional demo also be
able to
> > be used as a real application (or the basis for one)? A pet store
shopping
> > cart isn't rocket science. Even if it is just an educational science
> > project, why does it have to be that much more complex and overly done
than
> > an equivalent application in another language/system/os.
> >
> > The point being is that M$ claims that their version of PetStore is that
> > much smaller and easier to understand. Well, if their version also has
all
> > of the same showcase of features, then how come it is still that much
> > smaller/simpler/faster?
>
> Except that (someone noted) that the MSFT version doesn't have all the
same
> features, so it's not a valid comparison.
>
> This is an opportunity for us to build a PetStore example w/o a middle
tier,
> and see how that compares to the .NET version.
Agreed.
It could also be a useful comparison to see how simple Java of PetStore, w/o
a middle tier compares to the full-monty, multi-tiered EJB PetStore
implementation with data access objects, session beans, entity beans, state
beans and all those other patterns.
i.e. a way for developers to evaluate what the time & performance
differences are (both in development, maintenance and runtime) from doing
things in a simple way, just at the web tier with a seperation from business
logic, persistence & presentation or using all the various EJB technologies
& related patterns.
Then developers could see how it affects the amount of code, what different
deployment topologies are open to them etc. It could help developers decide
when EJB is right for them and when its not.
I admit I'm an EJB-cynic myself after being burnt on several projects -
however it would be good if the EJB-petstore could clearly demonstrate the
benefits they offer over using just regular beans in a single-tier petstore.
All that extra money we need to pay to the EJB vendors and all that extra
code & complexity must have some clearly demonstrable benefits right? :-)
James
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@optonline.net>.
On 11/2/01 3:13 AM, "Jon Stevens" <jo...@latchkey.com> wrote:
> on 11/1/01 11:59 PM, "Matt Egyhazy" <mw...@virginia.edu> wrote:
>
>> perhaps sun should make it more clear that petshop is not a benchmark and is
>> instead a multi-faceted example of the possibilities offered by j2ee. i
>> suppose they could rework it and create a benchmark out of it...
>>
>> microsoft is obviously misusing it...and that is possibly what they do best
>> (and are 'doing right'), spread FUD.
>>
>> matt
>
> I don't get it though. Why shouldn't a fully functional demo also be able to
> be used as a real application (or the basis for one)? A pet store shopping
> cart isn't rocket science. Even if it is just an educational science
> project, why does it have to be that much more complex and overly done than
> an equivalent application in another language/system/os.
>
> The point being is that M$ claims that their version of PetStore is that
> much smaller and easier to understand. Well, if their version also has all
> of the same showcase of features, then how come it is still that much
> smaller/simpler/faster?
Except that (someone noted) that the MSFT version doesn't have all the same
features, so it's not a valid comparison.
This is an opportunity for us to build a PetStore example w/o a middle tier,
and see how that compares to the .NET version.
geir
>
> I don't really see what M$ did as being FUD. What they are doing is showing
> the hypocrisy of Sun's marketing engine and the technologies that Sun is
> pushing on people to use.
>
> W a k e u p p e o p l e
>
> -jon
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr. geirm@optonline.net
System and Software Consulting
"He who throws mud only loses ground." - Fat Albert
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by Endre Stølsvik <En...@Stolsvik.com>.
On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Jon Stevens wrote:
| I don't really see what M$ did as being FUD. What they are doing is showing
| the hypocrisy of Sun's marketing engine and the technologies that Sun is
| pushing on people to use.
In my opinion, EJBs doesn't give you anything unless you are talking
really big corporate-stuff with lots of datasources and transactions and
blah blah going. On all these small things, like the stupid petshop, it is
_WAY_ overkill to use that kind of technology.
To show how the enterprise bean actually work, you do need some demo
application, though. And petshop is not so small that i becomes
rediculous, big enough to show some concepts, and small enough to fully
understand in a couple of hours.
But it's not _real_! You wouldn't make the petshop using EJBs if that
was the only thing your company was doing and selling.
Using this as a benchmark is just plain idiotic. And FUDish. It really
annoys me that people will think 'Look at this. MS is outperforming SUN
and Java by a factor of 10". ON A DEMO-OF-CONCEPTS APPLICATION?!?
| W a k e u p p e o p l e
To what, exactly? ;)
--
Mvh,
Endre
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by Jon Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com>.
on 11/1/01 11:59 PM, "Matt Egyhazy" <mw...@virginia.edu> wrote:
> perhaps sun should make it more clear that petshop is not a benchmark and is
> instead a multi-faceted example of the possibilities offered by j2ee. i
> suppose they could rework it and create a benchmark out of it...
>
> microsoft is obviously misusing it...and that is possibly what they do best
> (and are 'doing right'), spread FUD.
>
> matt
I don't get it though. Why shouldn't a fully functional demo also be able to
be used as a real application (or the basis for one)? A pet store shopping
cart isn't rocket science. Even if it is just an educational science
project, why does it have to be that much more complex and overly done than
an equivalent application in another language/system/os.
The point being is that M$ claims that their version of PetStore is that
much smaller and easier to understand. Well, if their version also has all
of the same showcase of features, then how come it is still that much
smaller/simpler/faster?
I don't really see what M$ did as being FUD. What they are doing is showing
the hypocrisy of Sun's marketing engine and the technologies that Sun is
pushing on people to use.
W a k e u p p e o p l e
-jon
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by Matt Egyhazy <mw...@virginia.edu>.
perhaps sun should make it more clear that petshop is not a benchmark and is
instead a multi-faceted example of the possibilities offered by j2ee. i
suppose they could rework it and create a benchmark out of it...
microsoft is obviously misusing it...and that is possibly what they do best
(and are 'doing right'), spread FUD.
matt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Stevens" <jo...@latchkey.com>
To: <ge...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 2:52 AM
Subject: Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
> on 10/31/01 5:41 PM, "horwat" <Ju...@Sun.com> wrote:
>
> > The J2EE PetStore application was created as an educational tool to
showcase
> > features available in a J2EE architecture. True, it has many more EJB's
then
> > required in a normal application but these EJB's are meant to be
examples of
> > how the technology can be used. PetStore shows by example various design
> > patterns and is not meant to be a benchmarked application.
> >
> > Microsoft is really missing the point in their benchmark. In their port
they
> > don't have a middle tier. They are really missing the meat of the
> > architecture and essentially have a database accessible through
webpages. It
> > is this middle tier, through the use of EJBs, that allows pluggability
and
> > reusability of business logic.
> >
> > It is quite telling that Microsoft targeted a strawman, non-optimized,
> > education focused application instead of an official J2EE benchmark like
> > ECPerf.
> >
> > Justy
>
> Why can't anyone learn that providing crummy examples only encourages
people
> to create crummy applications? Most of the people out there probably try
to
> copy/paste as much code as they can from samples like the PetStore. People
> who are even looking at it in the first place are looking at it as the
'Sun
> approved' way of creating applications.
>
> If you are really trying to educate people how to use various design
> patterns, then why not show them the right way in the first place?
>
> Am I the only one who sees the hypocrisy in all of this?
>
> p.s. Sun's stock price is flying at a whopping 10.84. M$ must be doing
> something right (at 61.84).
>
> -jon
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by horwat <Ju...@Sun.com>.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Stevens" <jo...@latchkey.com>
To: <ge...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 11:52 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
> on 10/31/01 5:41 PM, "horwat" <Ju...@Sun.com> wrote:
(SNIP cutting my own original message)
> Why can't anyone learn that providing crummy examples only encourages
people
> to create crummy applications? Most of the people out there probably try
to
> copy/paste as much code as they can from samples like the PetStore. People
> who are even looking at it in the first place are looking at it as the
'Sun
> approved' way of creating applications.
Excuse me? Your argument is once again an emotional one. I'm not getting
into an emotional argument with you. No one on any of the Apache lists has
ever won one of those and I'm no fool.
> If you are really trying to educate people how to use various design
> patterns, then why not show them the right way in the first place?
That's what PetStore is doing, demonstrating how to implement proven design
patterns.
> Am I the only one who sees the hypocrisy in all of this?
It's your opinion but nothing more.
> p.s. Sun's stock price is flying at a whopping 10.84. M$ must be doing
> something right (at 61.84).
Thank you very much for the stock insight. By that argument, the higher the
stock price the better the company is doing. That makes no sense.
> -jon
hugs and kisses,
Justy
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by Jon Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com>.
on 10/31/01 5:41 PM, "horwat" <Ju...@Sun.com> wrote:
> The J2EE PetStore application was created as an educational tool to showcase
> features available in a J2EE architecture. True, it has many more EJB's then
> required in a normal application but these EJB's are meant to be examples of
> how the technology can be used. PetStore shows by example various design
> patterns and is not meant to be a benchmarked application.
>
> Microsoft is really missing the point in their benchmark. In their port they
> don't have a middle tier. They are really missing the meat of the
> architecture and essentially have a database accessible through webpages. It
> is this middle tier, through the use of EJBs, that allows pluggability and
> reusability of business logic.
>
> It is quite telling that Microsoft targeted a strawman, non-optimized,
> education focused application instead of an official J2EE benchmark like
> ECPerf.
>
> Justy
Why can't anyone learn that providing crummy examples only encourages people
to create crummy applications? Most of the people out there probably try to
copy/paste as much code as they can from samples like the PetStore. People
who are even looking at it in the first place are looking at it as the 'Sun
approved' way of creating applications.
If you are really trying to educate people how to use various design
patterns, then why not show them the right way in the first place?
Am I the only one who sees the hypocrisy in all of this?
p.s. Sun's stock price is flying at a whopping 10.84. M$ must be doing
something right (at 61.84).
-jon
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by horwat <Ju...@Sun.com>.
The J2EE PetStore application was created as an educational tool to showcase
features available in a J2EE architecture. True, it has many more EJB's then
required in a normal application but these EJB's are meant to be examples of
how the technology can be used. PetStore shows by example various design
patterns and is not meant to be a benchmarked application.
Microsoft is really missing the point in their benchmark. In their port they
don't have a middle tier. They are really missing the meat of the
architecture and essentially have a database accessible through webpages. It
is this middle tier, through the use of EJBs, that allows pluggability and
reusability of business logic.
It is quite telling that Microsoft targeted a strawman, non-optimized,
education focused application instead of an official J2EE benchmark like
ECPerf.
Justy
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Strachan" <ja...@yahoo.co.uk>
To: <ge...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 1:19 PM
Subject: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/net/compare/petshop.asp
>
> Its not a very fair comparison (suprise suprise) but from a quick look at
> the source code, it seems MS achieve their performance gains by not using
> EJBs :-)
>
> I wonder what the figures would look like if the PetStore were implemented
> along similar techniques using just regular JavaBeans and JSP...
>
> James
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by Paul Hammant <Pa...@yahoo.com>.
One of the central points was there was less code. :
http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/compare/petshop.aspx
It would be easy with Orion, EJBDoclet and a decent WAR file compatible
page mark-up technology to beat the figures posted. Though not Apache,
we should not discount SiteMesh.( http://www.opensymphony.com/sitemesh/
) for the latter.
Regards,
- Paul H
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by Shawn McMurdo <sh...@lutris.com>.
FYI, Intel did a comparison of PetStore written using XMLC and no EJBs.
Check out the following performance analysis done
at the Intel performance labs that shows the PetStore app running 5x-10x faster
on Lutris Enhydra than BEA, etc when implemented using XMLC instead of JSPs
and using simple data objects instead of EJBs.
http://www.lutris.com/media/LutrisSG.pdf
Shawn
James Strachan wrote:
> From: "Jon Stevens" <jo...@latchkey.com>
> > on 10/31/01 1:19 PM, "James Strachan" <ja...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/net/compare/petshop.asp
> > >
> > > Its not a very fair comparison (suprise suprise) but from a quick look
> at
> > > the source code, it seems MS achieve their performance gains by not
> using
> > > EJBs :-)
> >
> > Ok. Now that is funny. I got a good laugh out of that one. Hi Justy!
> >
> > > I wonder what the figures would look like if the PetStore were
> implemented
> > > along similar techniques using just regular JavaBeans and JSP...
> >
> > I wonder what the figures would look like if the PetStore were implemented
> > along similar techniques using just Turbine and Velocity...
> >
> > Velocity already had results show it to be faster than JSP.
>
> I knew I shoulda said 'servlet' and not 'JSP' ;-)
>
> It would be interesting to have a Java competition - trying the various
> different techniques, tools and frameworks and seeing how each of them stack
> up to .NET. Comparing code complexity, performance etc.
>
> e.g. with beans or EJBs, with JDBC stored procedures or Turbine, with JSP or
> Velocity, then on a bunch of runtime platforms and databases and see how
> they stack up doing the same application.
>
> James
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
--
Shawn McMurdo mailto:shawn@lutris.com
Lutris Technologies http://www.lutris.com
Enhydra.Org http://www.enhydra.org
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by James Strachan <ja...@yahoo.co.uk>.
From: "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@optonline.net>
> On 10/31/01 6:45 PM, "James Strachan" <ja...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jon Stevens" <jo...@latchkey.com>
> >> on 10/31/01 1:54 PM, "James Strachan" <ja...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
> >>
> >>> It would be interesting to have a Java competition - trying the
various
> >>> different techniques, tools and frameworks and seeing how each of them
> > stack
> >>> up to .NET. Comparing code complexity, performance etc.
> >>>
> >>> e.g. with beans or EJBs, with JDBC stored procedures or Turbine, with
> > JSP or
> >>> Velocity, then on a bunch of runtime platforms and databases and see
how
> >>> they stack up doing the same application.
> >>>
> >>> James
> >>
> >> Unfortunately, none of us in Jakarta land get paid to write demo's so I
> >> doubt you will see one soon. :-(
> >
> > I know! I was thinking about it another way.
> >
> > Most frameworks end up making a sample web application to demonstrate
them
> > in action. So Velocity, Struts, XMLC, EJBDoclet, JSP tags and so on
could
> > just pick the PetStore as a demo to build in the future (or at least a
part
> > of it).
>
>
> I've been thinking of converting PetStore to Velocity, as we have had
> questions on the Velocity list asking about just that.
>
> It would give a real apples to apples comparison.
>
> As jon notes, it's going to be a bit of work, although we could try to
> recycle the lutris simple beans...
>
> Now, if I could just avoid sleep...
;-)
Thinking a bit more about it, using Turbine/Torque or Castor or EJBDoclet or
JDO or whatever it should be a pretty quick job to make the 'simple beans'.
Then sharing the same set of simple beans we could experiment with plugging
in the various display/templating/framework technologies, Turbine, Velocity,
JSP/tags, struts, XMLC, Cocoon/XSLT etc.
James
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@optonline.net>.
On 10/31/01 6:45 PM, "James Strachan" <ja...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jon Stevens" <jo...@latchkey.com>
>> on 10/31/01 1:54 PM, "James Strachan" <ja...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> It would be interesting to have a Java competition - trying the various
>>> different techniques, tools and frameworks and seeing how each of them
> stack
>>> up to .NET. Comparing code complexity, performance etc.
>>>
>>> e.g. with beans or EJBs, with JDBC stored procedures or Turbine, with
> JSP or
>>> Velocity, then on a bunch of runtime platforms and databases and see how
>>> they stack up doing the same application.
>>>
>>> James
>>
>> Unfortunately, none of us in Jakarta land get paid to write demo's so I
>> doubt you will see one soon. :-(
>
> I know! I was thinking about it another way.
>
> Most frameworks end up making a sample web application to demonstrate them
> in action. So Velocity, Struts, XMLC, EJBDoclet, JSP tags and so on could
> just pick the PetStore as a demo to build in the future (or at least a part
> of it).
I've been thinking of converting PetStore to Velocity, as we have had
questions on the Velocity list asking about just that.
It would give a real apples to apples comparison.
As jon notes, it's going to be a bit of work, although we could try to
recycle the lutris simple beans...
Now, if I could just avoid sleep...
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr. geirm@optonline.net
System and Software Consulting
You're going to end up getting pissed at your software
anyway, so you might as well not pay for it. Try Open Source.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by James Strachan <ja...@yahoo.co.uk>.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Stevens" <jo...@latchkey.com>
> on 10/31/01 1:54 PM, "James Strachan" <ja...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > It would be interesting to have a Java competition - trying the various
> > different techniques, tools and frameworks and seeing how each of them
stack
> > up to .NET. Comparing code complexity, performance etc.
> >
> > e.g. with beans or EJBs, with JDBC stored procedures or Turbine, with
JSP or
> > Velocity, then on a bunch of runtime platforms and databases and see how
> > they stack up doing the same application.
> >
> > James
>
> Unfortunately, none of us in Jakarta land get paid to write demo's so I
> doubt you will see one soon. :-(
I know! I was thinking about it another way.
Most frameworks end up making a sample web application to demonstrate them
in action. So Velocity, Struts, XMLC, EJBDoclet, JSP tags and so on could
just pick the PetStore as a demo to build in the future (or at least a part
of it).
Also, developers trying to learn new frameworks or tools, try build sample
web applications first to see how they work. So we could try encourage
people to 'do the pet store' as a benchmark when learning to use new OS
tools. As Shawn's already pointed out, Lutris have 'done the pet store' -
I'm sure others have or will over time.
Then we could try link 'em all together on a web page somewhere then folks
can do like-for-like comparisons. Each of the different patterns, frameworks
and tools have their own strengths and weaknesses, it'd be nice for the
differnet communities to be able to learn from each other.
Also hopefully we'll be able to switch bits of the petstore. e.g. share the
same beans but use JSP or struts or Velocity or XMLC for the presentation
(say). So I don't think every project has to build the whole lot.
> Needless to say, Scarab is fully OSS, performs quite well and the code is
a
> very nice example of how to write an extremely complex web app.
>
> <http://scarab.tigris.org/>
Thanks for the link, I'll take a peek.
James
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.
Jon Stevens at jon@latchkey.com wrote:
> Needless to say, Scarab is fully OSS, performs quite well and the code is a
> very nice example of how to write an extremely complex web app.
>
> <http://scarab.tigris.org/>
(Just to repeat myself) _I_WANT_IT_NOW_TO_REPLACE_THAT_STINK_OF_BUGZILLA_
(Basically, when is it going to be working?)
Pier
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by Jon Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com>.
on 10/31/01 1:54 PM, "James Strachan" <ja...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> It would be interesting to have a Java competition - trying the various
> different techniques, tools and frameworks and seeing how each of them stack
> up to .NET. Comparing code complexity, performance etc.
>
> e.g. with beans or EJBs, with JDBC stored procedures or Turbine, with JSP or
> Velocity, then on a bunch of runtime platforms and databases and see how
> they stack up doing the same application.
>
> James
Unfortunately, none of us in Jakarta land get paid to write demo's so I
doubt you will see one soon. :-(
Needless to say, Scarab is fully OSS, performs quite well and the code is a
very nice example of how to write an extremely complex web app.
<http://scarab.tigris.org/>
-jon
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by James Strachan <ja...@yahoo.co.uk>.
From: "Jon Stevens" <jo...@latchkey.com>
> on 10/31/01 1:19 PM, "James Strachan" <ja...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > http://msdn.microsoft.com/net/compare/petshop.asp
> >
> > Its not a very fair comparison (suprise suprise) but from a quick look
at
> > the source code, it seems MS achieve their performance gains by not
using
> > EJBs :-)
>
> Ok. Now that is funny. I got a good laugh out of that one. Hi Justy!
>
> > I wonder what the figures would look like if the PetStore were
implemented
> > along similar techniques using just regular JavaBeans and JSP...
>
> I wonder what the figures would look like if the PetStore were implemented
> along similar techniques using just Turbine and Velocity...
>
> Velocity already had results show it to be faster than JSP.
I knew I shoulda said 'servlet' and not 'JSP' ;-)
It would be interesting to have a Java competition - trying the various
different techniques, tools and frameworks and seeing how each of them stack
up to .NET. Comparing code complexity, performance etc.
e.g. with beans or EJBs, with JDBC stored procedures or Turbine, with JSP or
Velocity, then on a bunch of runtime platforms and databases and see how
they stack up doing the same application.
James
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [OT] MS makes a better PetShop...
Posted by Jon Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com>.
on 10/31/01 1:19 PM, "James Strachan" <ja...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/net/compare/petshop.asp
>
> Its not a very fair comparison (suprise suprise) but from a quick look at
> the source code, it seems MS achieve their performance gains by not using
> EJBs :-)
Ok. Now that is funny. I got a good laugh out of that one. Hi Justy!
> I wonder what the figures would look like if the PetStore were implemented
> along similar techniques using just regular JavaBeans and JSP...
I wonder what the figures would look like if the PetStore were implemented
along similar techniques using just Turbine and Velocity...
Velocity already had results show it to be faster than JSP.
-jon
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>