I have the task of migrating our webapp from grand old Spring 2.X (mvc, security, webflow etc.) to Spring 3.X, which is quite some work but actually pretty straight-forward. Now I ran into a few problems regarding our closed-source, commercial piece of community-functionality, which apparently is built against Spring 2.X. I tried decompiling parts of it, recompiling with updated Spring packages etc., but it's very cumbersome and after a day of work I stopped since this does not seem to be the right direction I'm headin.
Is it possible to strip apart those parts of the whole webapp alongside the commercial stuff (which unfortunately cannot be exchanged just like that, it'd be a rather large project) and weave a new 'legacy'-webapp that's running Spring 2.X, while having the larger part migrated to Spring 3.X - and everything up and running in the same container, hopping to and fro?
so e.g. when accessing URLs like /account/overview.htm the legacy-webapp is accessed while the rest is being served from the brand-new one??
If this sounds like too far ahead, I'm open for alternatives....
thanks beforehand!
Cheers
I guess the answer is both YES/NO:
of course you can run two different war in the same container regardless of the libraries they use
you must be aware of the two webapps holding two different contexts (beans, authentication, ...)
Related
My project has requirement to deploy a Java Based application as an operating system Job (and not use any container). The application need to have following capabilities:-
Scheduling
Few HTTPS based services
Ability to make JMX calls
Storage: Data for last 5 to 10 minutes of transactions (not more than 600 rows X 20 columns). Something like embedded H2 or in-memory options
Decision Tree: Something like Drools..
My manager wants to write this application as a core Java with OSGized Jetty version. I am suggesting to use Spring Boot with embedded Jetty(which will give me ready to use capabilities for Scheduling, JMX Integration and REST Services).
His bend towards core Java is emerging from the requirement that this application needs to be extremely efficient, fast and self-contained. He wants to reduce dependency on any open source. I have never worked directly on OSGI but have used products coming out of it - like eclipse.
Can somebody guide how OSGI based development might benefit over SpringBoot?
For many people, OSGi is superfluous, because they don't see the value in being modular. Not being worth the trouble.
Think about the application lifecycle, more or less being plan-develop-test-deploy.
How many developers you have? If many, OSGi helps a lot, because being modular make the boundaries very clear. You can delegate things very easily.
If outsourcing is your thing, you can just handle the module APIs and tell them to develop against it. They will never know how the rest was implemented, no fear of secrets being leaked.
Unit tests are so easy. You obviously see what you can test, every else you mock/stub/spy/fake. Unit tests can be can be reused in Integration tests, of course that isn't news, but the trick is running Unit tests outside the OSGi container, and Integration tests inside. So if you decide OSGi was not worth it, your code stills works fine (unit tests being the proof).
You can make your app a collection of modules, and every module having independent versioning and source repositories. Makes easier to handle and find bugs. For example, the current app crashed, you find out that sub-module-1.2 is throwing errors, try with version sub-module-1.1(still bad), then version 1.0(good), bug was introduced in 1.1 (avoids bisecting the source code). Programmers don't need to be perfectly synchronized with each other if they are working in different modules.
How do you plan to update the app? Most frameworks are of the all-or-nothing approach, where you have to stop the world, update, then restart the app. If you make things modular, you just need to update that thing. Making the downtime very small, and sometimes even zero.
If you need to make a big change in your app, but can't afford to refactor everything right now. With OSGi you can run the system with both my-module-1.0 and my-module-2.0. You can even adapt my-module-1.0 to redirect calls to my-module-2.0, but that is a kind of last resort hack (just saying that you can, if you want to).
I can do everything you say without OSGi, right? Well, probably you can, but in the end, would be something like OSGi.
I love the Dependency Injection of my framework. No problem, OSGi have something like that.
I hate Dependency Injection, it kills my app perfomance. No problem, you can use something like osgi.getService(MyService.class);. The OSGi container isn't concerned about intercepting every call of your app.
OSGi is like Java++, Java plus modules.
You can mix Spring Boot with OSGi, can't say if this is good or bad. There are many libraries and frameworks that fit your list, many will work out-of-the-box with OSGi.
Am a total beginner with spring framework and trying to know if it even fits my use case, before investing time learning it.
I'm responsible for a stand alone java project(used as a jar by a server) which basically serves requests from a server, and in turn makes service calls to various internal services.
This standalone java project, currently has all of its service calls hard coded. I want to use Spring to inject dependencies so I can make this stuff testable.
I have no idea how spring works. Does it even hold for standalone jars or is it only for 'running applications'?
If I make my standalone project 'spring enabled', when the server uses my jar, will it automagically work by creating beans or is there some requirement from the server side?
In short, yes, you can use Spring in a standalone jar-application ("console application", if you will), we do it all the time at work. You just need to create the ApplicationContext yourself when your application starts, see for example here: http://www.devdaily.com/blog/post/java/load-spring-application-context-file-java-swing-application
This is just one example I pulled straight out of Google, there are probably numerous others. Still, you really need to read at least the basics from the Spring documentation to get started, otherwise you'll probably hit a wall pretty soon.
The current system I am working on uses Tomcat 7.0 and Spring 3.1 the system is a collection of web apps that all have the same classpath in WEB-INF\lib, I am thinking of adding spring 3.1 to my tomcat\lib so that all the web apps have access to it. Is this safe to do with Spring 3.1?
Safe to add Spring 3.1 to the Tomcat main lib directory? Quite possibly. Good idea? Probably not; as the system administrator you'd be taking on the responsibility for ensuring that all the webapps can use that exact version of Spring (including all the issues that can crop up when you update things) because the webapps would not be able to override it to anything else. (To be fair, they could load classes from elsewhere that weren't in the standard system version you're proposing, but that's likely to be an extremely bad idea as there would be problems with warring versions of the same library. That's a very confusing situation to be in; avoid if at all possible!)
As a general rule I only put very basic shared libraries like JDBC drivers in tomcat/lib. Sharing other libraries will often lead to classloader issues in tomcat. Unfortunately, I don't know the publish date of it, but you might find this article http://www.mulesoft.com/tomcat-classpath useful.
I know the title may seem like apples & oranges, but hear me out... :)
I'm building the architecture of an MVC app and considering what to use for the core of the controller / services. This stack will also serve as a RESTful API which will be equally as important as the UI.
I'm narrowing down my stack to be built with either Grails or JAX-RS (at this point I've ruled out other options and am not super interested in expanding this list). Either way I'll be using Groovy, and my model and views will be virtually unaffected by this choice, so that further levels some of the differences between the two. Here are the pros/cons that I've been pondering and was wondering if anyone had any other inputs or caveat experiences.
Grails
I am not going to use a ton of the built-in Grails features (GSP/SiteMesh, Hibernate, nearly all plugins), so I'm concerned that Grails might be a bit heavy for my purposes
I'm concerned that I won't have enough control over my ability to handle the REST API since it is very view-centric
I've seen inconsistencies in the quality of plugins to the point where I'm not sure I consider them much of a 'pro'
I love the convention-over-configuration & edit-and-refresh, to the point where I'd probably want to wire up something similar if I go with JAX-RS
I like the grails command line for everything it streamlines, but I'm concerned that it might get in my way since I'm not using as much of the stack
I like the scaffolding but since I'm not using Hibernate or GSP/SiteMesh it might not mesh well
JAX-RS
JAX-RS is made for REST. This will make my RESTful API really a snap to implement as I have complete control
Groovy is an important part of what makes Grails shine, so I'll benefit from that even in JAX-RS
I love how JAX-RS doesn't automatically pull in a bunch of other things so I can have more control of what components are in/out
unfortunately since it doesn't pull in everything else anything that I end up needing will require more work, whereas Grails might have a plugin
the grails command line and scaffolding will be missed; perhaps Maven can fill some gaps
It seems like the capabilities of each for creating actions and routing are pretty similar (although the implementation styles are different). In fact there are other SO questions wish touch upon this so I'm not too concerned.
I wrote a small REST service prototype in several frameworks last year (namely Grails, Play!, Spring MVC, Jersey, Restlet). My feeling about Grails in this concern was that although Grails supports REST style architecture, it isn't really made for it. I don't want to get religious here, so if you only want to map resources to URLs and HTTP verbs your fine, but if you want to dig deeper into REST with tight control over return codes, location headers, etc. you might still be able to do it with Grails, but it is probably better supported in a pure REST framework.
Grails also comes with a lot of dependencies, which might not be a problem if you're starting on a green field, but can cause problems when you have to integrate it with existing legacy components or frameworks.
From the two used REST frameworks, I liked Jersey more, as it just worked in my case and the documentation was good (although a bit focused on Maven and Netbeans).
Yeah, it does seem heavy to build on a MVC framework when you're not going to use the model or the view. While the autowiring and simplified configuration is super nice, Grails would still be providing a lot of extra stuff that you don't need.
I'd personally take the lighter approach and leave Grails out, using any standalone libraries or writing custom code which provide the features that you do want. There's a number of container projects listed on the Groovy site, perhaps Spring or one of the alternatives would add some value to your architecture.
I'm looking to make a website that will probably get some heavy, repetitive traffic. Is grails up to the task?
I agree with lael, also because it's built on java technologies there are a lot of proven clustering and 'enterprisey' tools available which allow you to easily scale across multiple application services.
The cloud tools around Grails are also becoming very good and make deploying to a cloud like EC2 very easy. I've recently been using Cloud Foundry and found it very good.
As the first poster points out however, you can write a badly performing application in any framework/language. One thing I'd recommend is getting a good understanding of Hibernate which is the underlying persistence library. If you understand how that works, it should help you avoid making any silly mistakes at the DB level. On this side of things, a tool like p6spy is great for checking what the database is up to during normal use. It should help you spot any repetitive queries.
The scalability of your web application won't really depend on what language/framework you choose to use, but rather how your application is built. You can build a scalable web application in Grails, just as you can build an incredibly slow application in C++. If Grails is the framework you would like to use, then use it; you can always rewrite the slow parts in Java or another fast language, if need be. (After all, that's what Twitter did with Scala.)
Disclaimer: I've never actually used Grails.
Grails is essentially a thin layer on top of the Spring Framework, which many consider to be a very scalable framework in the enterprise world. Spring + Hibernate has become a standard in many Java shops around the globe.
If you run into performance bottlenecks in Groovy, you can always rewrite those parts in Java.
Take a look at the Success Stories for examples of sites that were written in Grails. The Testamonials are also a good place to look for examples. You will use a little more memory(heap and permgen) than a vanilla Java app, but you can tune it just like you would any other Java application.
On the low end you aren't going to find $3/month Hosting options that you could with PHP stack (for example). That said, there are some good caching solutions for Grails apps EhCache, MemCache, etc. Beyond that you can also setup an Apache layer to caches static resources or whatever you need.
Don't mean to pile on here. You've already got some great answers but I just want to add on thing that I was reminded of recently. Scalability depends not only on the software you write (regardless of language/framework) but also on the deployment environment. A very well written application deployed on an undersized or poorly configured server will not scale at all. If you do use Grails or any other Java based framework, the default settings on your container (Tomcat, JBoss, etc.) will probably not be what you need.
Just something to keep in mind,
Dave
Grails run on the JVM. Simply put, you will not find a more scalable, solid and robust runtime platform than the JVM, anywhere. That's Grails's big advantage over, say, PHP or RoR.