You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@jackrabbit.apache.org by "Goel, Ajay" <aj...@epsilon.com> on 2012/04/13 16:36:55 UTC

RMI for performance critical app

The documentation talks about RMI not being optimum for performance critical app. Can someone involved with this project please confirm if this statement (Note also that RMI remoting layer has not been optimized for performance) only applies to the standalone deployment http://jackrabbit.apache.org/standalone-server.html?



Thanks


________________________________
This e-mail and files transmitted with it are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not one of the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you received this message in error, please immediately notify sender by e-mail, and destroy the original message. Thank You.

Re: RMI for performance critical app

Posted by Mark Herman <MH...@NBME.org>.
ajgoel wrote
> 
> The documentation talks about RMI not being optimum for performance
> critical app. Can someone involved with this project please confirm if
> this statement (Note also that RMI remoting layer has not been optimized
> for performance) only applies to the standalone deployment
> http://jackrabbit.apache.org/standalone-server.html?
> 

It doesn't matter how you deploy your jackrabbit, if you connect via RMI,
there isn't much that jackrabbit can do about the performance hit.

RMI as a technology is known for having bad performance regardless of
whatever code is on the other end.  It's convenient for just making
something work, but if your application has aggressive performance
requirements, running your code inside the same jvm as jackrabbit is the way
to go. The statement is simply saying that they've satisfied the "just work"
part of rmi (for the most part), but haven't gone in and tried to design
around the inherited limitations of the RMI protocol. 



--
View this message in context: http://jackrabbit.510166.n4.nabble.com/RMI-for-performance-critical-app-tp4555016p4555445.html
Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.