I am currently working on an enterprise application that is deployed to GlassFish. I am attempting to figure out the right way to communicate to a cassandra backend from within an EJB that has been deployed to GlassFish 3.1. I would prefere to use Pelops to talk to Cassandra.
Disclaimer: I am new to Java EE and the concepts behind enterprise app servers and EJBs; one of the purposes of this project is to learn these topics. This is out of scope of this question as I am really just looking to be pointed in the right direction for best practices or where I should go to find best practices; so far google has not been very helpful/consistent on this topic.
More specifically, should I be thinking about writing a JCA connector for cassandra? Using a singleton EJB that talks to cassandra via Pelops? Just use pelops directly in my EJBs? (though I thought your not supposed to create socket connections in ejbs) Something else entirely?
The EJB spec prohibits EJBs from opening server sockets, but not sockets. However, it does also prohibit EJBs from creating threads. Does Pelops (or Hector) create threads to handle its pooling?
The letter of the law aside, since both those libraries do pooling, they definitely feel like something that belongs in the resource adapter layer to me. I would be nervous about EJBs, whose lifecycle is controlled by the container, and is potentially quite short, hanging on to a resource like a connection pool whose lifecycle is somewhat independent, and should be longer.
That said, most implementations of EJB are quite forgiving, so whether the use of Pelops/Hector directly from EJBs is architecturally right or not, it is very likely that it will work.
If i had all the time in the world, i would write a resource adapter wrapping one or the other of those libraries. However, that would be a considerable investment of resources in pursuit of a negligible practical return.
we are developing a similar application where I work now, even if we do not implement EJB, we deploy a backend to Glassfish 3.1 and internally we have created a small library that talks to Cassandra.
Right now the most used library for connecting and working with Cassandra is Hector:
https://github.com/rantav/hector
It is very actively developed. I have never seen it in use inside an EJB, but I used it and it is very solid. Do not how Pelops is developed though.
What we have developed here is a very custom application tailored to our needs, that is why we didn't use Hector in the first place.
As long as you use client sockets in EJB, you should be safe, the restriction on EJB is for server socket that should be handled by the app server. But if you have other needs, you should write your JCA.
Related
Lately I started to learn Java EE and related technologies and there are some concepts which confuse me. Somewhere I read that whenever one is building a Java EE application then it is sort of mandatory to use a container.
Currently, I am learning Spring framework and trying to build a small application with it to get hands-on. Now in that I am not sure if it is mandatory for me to use a container (say Tomcat) or it depends application which I am building that I need a container or not.
If it depends on the application that one is building, then what are the factors which help to decide whether a container should be used or not?
Puuhhh, this is a very big question and there is no simple answer. But I will do my best to explain my own opinion at least:
What are containers?
Containers provide functionality to you. Such a functionality can be to handle web request and dispatch them to servlets - in this case we call them servlet containers (e.g. Tomcat or Jetty).
But containers can also provide other things, e.g. they can provide user authentication, logging or the connection to a database. Most containers (e.g. Tomcat) do multiple of those things (e.g. Tomcat does all I mentioned). Some containers do more then others, e.g. JBoss can do much more than Tomcat.
Trade Off
However, there is a trade off: If you use a simple container (like Tomcat), you need to do a lot of things on you own or by using other Frameworks (like Spring). But if you use a powerful container, you must know the container very well and the chance is high that your application will depend on this concrete container sooner or later.
The point, that using a container is not mandatory. It is a decision. Some people will argue for it, others against it. But depending on the books you read, this decision is already made (e.g. J2EE needs a J2EE container, that's how it works).
The trend (IMHO)
Years ago the trend was to use big and powerful (J2EE) containers which provide as much as possible. IMHO the trend today is to use smaller and light-way solutions. Most developers would prefer to use a Tomcat server instead of a JBoss server today.
Frameworks without containers
While J2EE needs a container, there are other frameworks/technologies which supports the development of web applications without any external container. Such frameworks are Play! or Spark Java.
Note
If you are not familiar with containers and Spring, take care to don't get confused. Most applications you will develop with Spring are web applications which will be deployed to a servlet container. This is very common. But Spring doesn't relay on that. You can also use Spring without such a container, e.g. to develop a desktop application. But if you want to develop a web application, the Java-way is to use a servlet container.
If your application is using servlets, you'll need a container to handle the requests. Tomcat is a very popular choice.
I'll anticipate your next topic to cover with this discussion of "application server" versus "container."
There are two containers. One is Web Container (IIS, Apache) to run Web Applications and another is "Application Container" to run Enterprise Applications.
Web Applications = Apps developed using HTML, XML, CSS and JSPs
Enterprise Applications = Apps developed used JAVA, J2E and Serverlets in addition to HTML and XML.
We are developing a open source trading platform based on Springframework and Hibernate http://code.google.com/p/algo-trader/ and http://www.algotrader.ch. The application consists of a trading framework and several strategies that can be started independently. So far, these different parts have been running in separate JVM's communicating through RMI and JMS.
To avoid unnecessary serialization and network overhead we would like to run the entire application within some sort of container (potentially an application server). We do however have the requirement, that the individual parts of the application can be deployed, started and stopped independently.
We have looked into OSGi, but a lot of the libraries that we use are not OSGi ready yet, so this is not currently an option. Also please note, there is no web-GUI in our application.
Any suggestions on this?
Thanks
Andy
If OSGI is not an option then functionality can be broken into smaller units and then deploy them as utility jar, if deployed as utility jar they can be managed independently.
For application server I feel either glassfish or Jboss will be a good option considering they are open source and free.
Though at a later point in time you can check with Weblogic (Dev free).
So in your case you would like to break the static data configuration(Counterparty, Currencies), Dealing(Pricing, Quoting, Booking) as two separate feature.
For your choose of an application server i advise you Jboss and specially in his version 7.1 which is faster and more stable!
I've been reading/learning more about Spring lately, and how one would use Spring in combination with other open-source tools like Tomcat and Hibernate. I'm evaluating whether or not Spring MVC could be a possible replacement technology for the project I work on, which uses WebLogic and a LOT of custom-rolled Java EE code. The thing is, I've always suspected that our solution is over-engineered and WAY more complex than it needs to be. Amazingly, it's 2009, and yet, we're writing our own transaction-handling and thread-pooling classes. And it's not like we're Amazon, eBay, or Google, if you know what I mean. Thus, I'm investigating a "simpler is better" option.
So here's my question: I'd like to hear opinions on how you make the decision that a full-blown Java EE application server is necessary, or not. How do you "measure" the size/load/demand on a Java EE app? Number of concurrent users? Total daily transactions? How "heavy" does an app need to get before you throw up your hands in surrender and say, "OK, Tomcat just isn't cutting it, we need JBoss/WebLogic/WebSphere"?
I don't think that the decision to use a full-fledged Java EE server or not should be based on number of users or transactions. Rather it should be based on whether you need the functionality.
In my current project we're actually moving away from JBoss to vanilla Tomcat because we realized we weren't using any of the Java EE functionality beyond basic servlets anyway. We are, however, using Spring. Between Spring's basic object management, transaction handling and JDBC capabilities, we aren't seeing a compelling need for EJB. We currently use Struts 2 rather than Spring's MVC, but I've heard great things about that. At any rate, Spring integrates well with a number of Java web frameworks.
Spring does not attempt to replace certain advanced parts of the JavaEE spec, such as JMS and JTA. Instead, it builds on those, making them consistent with the "Spring way", and generally making them easier to use.
If your application requires the power of the likes of JMS and JTA, then you can easily use them via Spring. Not a problem with that.
Google open sources a lot of their code. If you're writing low-level things yourself, instead of implementing code that's already written, you're often overthinking the problem.
Back to the actual question, Walmart.com, etrade.com, The Weather Channel and quite a few others just use Tomcat. Marketing and sales guys from IBM would have you believe different, perhaps, but there's no upper limit on Tomcat.
Except for EJB, I'm not sure what Tomcat is missing, and I'm not a fan of EJB.
What tomcat does not offer apart from the more exotic elements of Java EE is session beans (aka EJBs). Session beans allow you to isolate your processing efficiently. So you could have one box for the front end, another for the session beans (business logic) and another for the database.
You would want to do this for at least 2 reasons:
Performance; You're finding that one box to handle everything is loading the box too much. Separating the different layers onto different boxes would allow you to scale out. Session beans are also able to load balance at a more fine grained level. Tomcat and other web services of that ilk don't have clustering out of the box.
Flexibility; Now that you've moved your business logic into its own environment you could develop an alternate front end which used the same layer, but say, was a thick client front end for example. Or maybe other contexts would like to make use of the session beans.
Though I should probably point out that if you use web services to communicate with that middle tier, it could also be on tomcat!
The only reason to use a full blown Java EE server is if you need distributed XA transactions, if you don't need XA transactions then you can use Spring + JPA + Tomcat + Bean Validation + JSTL + EL + JSP + Java Mail.
Also a Java EE server is supposed to implement JMS but it does not make sense to run the JMS server in the same VM as the rest of the app server so if you need JMS you should have a separate JMS server.
I strongly disagree with all answers given here.
Everything can be added to Tomcat, including EJB, CDI, JTA, Bean Validation, JAX-RS, etc.
The question is: do you want this? Do you want to assemble all those dependencies in the right versions and test that it all works together, when others have already done this?
Let's be clear: nobody uses only Tomcat! Everyone always adds a web framework, an ioc container, an orm, a transaction manager, web services, etc etc
Lightweight Java EE servers like TomEE already include all of that and makes the full stack experience of having all those things integrated so much better.
Maybe this can be of interest:
http://onjava.com/onjava/2006/02/08/j2ee-without-application-server.html
HTH
Does anybody has an experience with Spring Integration project as embedded ESB?
I'm highly interesting in such use cases as:
Reading files from directory on schedule basis
Getting data from JDBC data source
Modularity and possibility to start/stop/redeploy module on the fly (e.g. one module can scan directory on schedule basis, another call query from jdbc data source etc.)
repeat/retry policy
UPDATE:
I found answers on all my questions except "Getting data from JDBC data source". Is it technically possible?
Remember, "ESB" is just a marketing term designed to sell more expensive software, it's not a magic bullet. You need to consider the specific jobs you need your software to do, and pick accordingly. If Spring Integration seems to fit the bill, I wouldn't be too concerned if it doesn't look much like an uber-expensive server installation.
The Spring Integration JDBC adapters are available in 2.0, and we just released GA last week. Here's the relevant section from the reference manual: http://static.springsource.org/spring-integration/docs/latest-ga/reference/htmlsingle/#jdbc
This link describes the FileSucker with Spring Integration. Read up on your Enterprise Integration patterns for more info I think.
I kinda think you need to do a bit more investigation your self, or do a couple of tries on some of your usecases. Then we can discuss whats good and bad
JDBC Adapters appear to be a work in progress.
Even if there is no specific adapter available, remember that Spring Integration is a thin wrapper around POJOs. You'll be able to access JDBC in any component e.g. your service activators.
See here for a solution based on a polling inbound channel adapter too.
Is there a way to call an EJB that is served through WebSphere (iiop://host:port/ejbName) from a vanilla JRE (like Sun). A lot of people have been telling me that this type of architecture relies in a homogenous environment. Thoughts?
Yes, this is possible. You have to create something called a thin client. It has limitations on JNDI lookups due to not being part of the container environment, so fully qualified names have to be used.
Just search for "thin client ibm ejb" on google. Unfortunately, I don't have the link to the appropriate libraries (for WAS 6) here, they are at work.
Although it’s possible, I wouldn’t recommend it because you’re asking for troubles using RMI-IIOP in a heterogeneous environment.
My approach would be to expose the EJB as a web service and consume at the client.