You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@jakarta.apache.org by Vic Cekvenich <vi...@basebeans.com> on 2002/02/20 18:42:06 UTC
EJB = bad = MS.net
Home page of Jakarta has this
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/news.html#0130.2
on this:
http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg03376.html
I agree. Doing EJBs is bad on many levels and creates more problems.
Avoid EJB if you want to stay in Java.
Alternative is to just use Struts + TomCat + RowSet (or DAO if you are
doing something simple or small) and done. This is the sweet spot. MVC
is all you need.
Alternative, do EJBs and your organization WILL switch to MS .NET on the
next project, leave J2EE, and you have to learn VB.net.
EJBs are for newbies. (If you need middleware (very rare) use SOAP)
lol,
Vic
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: EJB = bad = MS.net
Posted by Pete Chown <Pe...@skygate.co.uk>.
Vic Cekvenich wrote:
> Doing EJBs is bad on many levels and creates more problems.
Do you feel that the idea of an EJB-like system is bad, or just that
EJBs specifically were badly designed? I would be interested to hear
your thoughts on a better alternative.
I feel that web programming is currently not using programmers' time
very efficiently -- you have to write a lot of repetitive, routine
code. It would be nice to find a more powerful way of expressing the
logic of a website, so making the process less tedious (and saving
money).
--
Pete
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: EJB = bad = MS.net
Posted by "Edward Q. Bridges" <e....@argo-tec.de>.
i like EJBs (note that i said "like" and not "love"). i think they have
some applicability.
however, a peeve of mine about EJBs and the spec is this claim of "location
independence." furthermore, the claim to location independence is eroding:
note that in the 1.1 spec it claims:
"The client view of an entity bean is location independent." (8.1)
and in the corresponding section of the 2.0 spec, this has evolved to the
more mealy-mouthed:
"The client of an entity bean may be a remote client or the client may
be a local client."
the point of location independence is that a client should not be concerned
about where the method call is taking place. but, this has been built into
the spec from day one. ("RemoteException", "RemoteHome", . . . ).
perhaps this is a trivial point, but it is misleading, misrepresentative,
and is an example (IMHO) of how EJBs are successful at making things more
complicated than they need to be.
regards
--e--
On Fri, 22 Feb 2002 08:55:52 +1100, dIon Gillard wrote:
>- location independence
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: EJB = bad = MS.net
Posted by "Edward Q. Bridges" <e....@argo-tec.de>.
i like EJBs (note that i said "like" and not "love"). i think they have
some applicability.
however, a peeve of mine about EJBs and the spec is this claim of "location
independence." furthermore, the claim to location independence is eroding:
note that in the 1.1 spec it claims:
"The client view of an entity bean is location independent." (8.1)
and in the corresponding section of the 2.0 spec, this has evolved to the
more mealy-mouthed:
"The client of an entity bean may be a remote client or the client may
be a local client."
the point of location independence is that a client should not be concerned
about where the method call is taking place. but, this has been built into
the spec from day one. ("RemoteException", "RemoteHome", . . . ).
perhaps this is a trivial point, but it is misleading, misrepresentative,
and is an example (IMHO) of how EJBs are successful at making things more
complicated than they need to be.
regards
--e--
On Fri, 22 Feb 2002 08:55:52 +1100, dIon Gillard wrote:
>- location independence
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: EJB = bad = MS.net
Posted by dIon Gillard <di...@multitask.com.au>.
Vic Cekvenich wrote:
> Home page of Jakarta has this
> http://jakarta.apache.org/site/news.html#0130.2
> on this:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg03376.html
>
> I agree. Doing EJBs is bad on many levels and creates more problems.
> Avoid EJB if you want to stay in Java.
>
> Alternative is to just use Struts + TomCat + RowSet (or DAO if you are
> doing something simple or small) and done. This is the sweet spot. MVC
> is all you need.
>
> Alternative, do EJBs and your organization WILL switch to MS .NET on
> the next project, leave J2EE, and you have to learn VB.net.
>
> EJBs are for newbies. (If you need middleware (very rare) use SOAP)
Thanks for the convincing argument.
So tell me how using Struts+Tomcat+RowSet you get:
- location independence
- distributed processing
- failover and clustering support
- transactional object behaviour for non-data classes
- pooled business objects
Ans since you're using SOAP, how do you handle things like massive
object creation issues on the SOAP Server? Write all that infrastructure
again? Sure why not.
--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
http://www.multitask.com.au/developers
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: EJB = bad = MS.net
Posted by Austin Gonyou <au...@coremetrics.com>.
That sounds more like opinion than fact. EJB's seem to work fine, and do
a good job, where they fit.
Why would you say that if you use EJBs you'll have to use .CRAP?
On Wed, 2002-02-20 at 11:42, Vic Cekvenich wrote:
> Home page of Jakarta has this
> http://jakarta.apache.org/site/news.html#0130.2
> on this:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg03376.html
>
> I agree. Doing EJBs is bad on many levels and creates more problems.
> Avoid EJB if you want to stay in Java.
>
> Alternative is to just use Struts + TomCat + RowSet (or DAO if you are
> doing something simple or small) and done. This is the sweet spot. MVC
> is all you need.
>
> Alternative, do EJBs and your organization WILL switch to MS .NET on the
>
> next project, leave J2EE, and you have to learn VB.net.
>
> EJBs are for newbies. (If you need middleware (very rare) use SOAP)
>
> lol,
> Vic
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
--
Austin Gonyou
Systems Architect, CCNA
Coremetrics, Inc.
Phone: 512-698-7250
email: austin@coremetrics.com
"It is the part of a good shepherd to shear his flock, not to skin it."
Latin Proverb
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: EJB = bad = MS.net
Posted by dIon Gillard <di...@multitask.com.au>.
Vic Cekvenich wrote:
> Home page of Jakarta has this
> http://jakarta.apache.org/site/news.html#0130.2
> on this:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg03376.html
>
> I agree. Doing EJBs is bad on many levels and creates more problems.
> Avoid EJB if you want to stay in Java.
>
> Alternative is to just use Struts + TomCat + RowSet (or DAO if you are
> doing something simple or small) and done. This is the sweet spot. MVC
> is all you need.
>
> Alternative, do EJBs and your organization WILL switch to MS .NET on
> the next project, leave J2EE, and you have to learn VB.net.
>
> EJBs are for newbies. (If you need middleware (very rare) use SOAP)
Thanks for the convincing argument.
So tell me how using Struts+Tomcat+RowSet you get:
- location independence
- distributed processing
- failover and clustering support
- transactional object behaviour for non-data classes
- pooled business objects
Ans since you're using SOAP, how do you handle things like massive
object creation issues on the SOAP Server? Write all that infrastructure
again? Sure why not.
--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
http://www.multitask.com.au/developers
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: EJB = bad = MS.net
Posted by Robert <rm...@bull-enterprises.com>.
EJBs are not bad in and of themselves, and certainly not for newbies.
They are easy to misuse as a lot of people have, and therefore have a
bad rep. Using good design patterns can help in a good EJB solution.
They solve some problems, and yes create others. Also as mentioned on
the JavaLobby website, "J2EE is not spelled Eee Jay Bee". JSP, Servlets,
JMS, and EJB all fall under the J2EE umbrella. Lest we forget that
Tomcat is the reference implementation of the J2EE JSP/Servlet APIs...
I've never been a big fan of J2EE security, but it IS abstracted away
from the developer. The biggest help is in transactions, being
declarative and in clustering the EJBs (yes I know you can cluster
webservers and servlet containers, but the code runs in one VM as
opposed to being _able_ to run across multiple in the same execution
sequence).
The alternative you suggest, Struts + Tomcat + RowSet, also has it's
place, and is more akin to the way the M$ petstore is built (not the
same, but more similar). I see no object model in the alternative, which
is useful in many, many environments.
Most public webapps probably don't need middleware, true. But in some
corporate apps (not all but some) middleware is a really helpful thing.
And saying that SOAP is Middleware, or a middleware alternative is like
saying SOAP can replace EJB. It's just showing ignorance of the
technology. SOAP is a communication mechanism like RMI, DCE, RPC, not a
middleware mechanism like EJB, JMS, etc.
I read the links posted, and in the one case it goes back to my earlier
statement, misuse or misunderstanding of the technology. What EJB the
right solution? Maybe not, then again it might have performed great if
designed/built right.
To blatantly disregard something as 'bad' doesn't help, and just sounds
like Microsoft when they said their petstore was better than Sun's. It
misses the point and says nothing.
- Robert
-----Original Message-----
From: Vic Cekvenich [mailto:vic@basebeans.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 11:42 AM
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Cc: general@jakarta.apache.org
Subject: EJB = bad = MS.net
Home page of Jakarta has this
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/news.html#0130.2
on this:
http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40jakarta.apache.org/msg03376.html
I agree. Doing EJBs is bad on many levels and creates more problems.
Avoid EJB if you want to stay in Java.
Alternative is to just use Struts + TomCat + RowSet (or DAO if you are
doing something simple or small) and done. This is the sweet spot. MVC
is all you need.
Alternative, do EJBs and your organization WILL switch to MS .NET on the
next project, leave J2EE, and you have to learn VB.net.
EJBs are for newbies. (If you need middleware (very rare) use SOAP)
lol,
Vic
--
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>