Mailing-List: contact user-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of mario.ruebsam@googlemail.com
 designates 66.249.92.169 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=googlemail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:from;
        b=tXsT6XsUUKX/CrZGbmTu+U/bV6YReqhinmtWL63S2/cWHh0YE6TkIUSBb+eXco+2UBA3Bw56oc3ZzVQduJSO+i71tT0yXJ+8b95I6oJ8ju4rEtjbxGlh1yQmgTqz6Jf1vfnJk84LCgrsc54mf8Sij0RXT8909mD7SkP16rTbsZA=
Message-ID: <44AE23B3.4000802@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2006 11:04:51 +0200
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (Windows/20060516)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: user@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: Re: Self-contained EAR
References: <20060707083544.28642.qmail@web37909.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <20060707083544.28642.qmail@web37909.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Mario Ruebsam <mario.ruebsam@googlemail.com>

What I learned in the last 6 years with EJB's and webapps is that
performance is mainly founded in the design of the application.
So it can differ from one app to another. Some app servers prefer
the used design some not.
I like to have a server which is customizable and G is customizable,
not only in the way the server runs but also in the way I can
distribute it(look at "Little G" and plugins). G is easily
configurable even by the customer and I can run the same system
on the central server and also on a notebook (Little-G) with db and
app. The latter is a mandatory requirement by our customer.
I don't like that huge systems that can do everything and I need
only 30% of it for a particular project. Also G comes with Jetty :-)
Thats in short why I stick with G.

Thanks,
Mario


gb.forums@yahoo.com wrote:
> I'll check out 1.0 then, but I've heard that performance is not really up to par...  Is this true?  And would you mind telling me why you sticked with Geronimo?
> 
> Thanks a lot Mario,
> GB
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Mario Ruebsam <mario.ruebsam@googlemail.com>
> To: user@geronimo.apache.org
> Sent: Friday, July 7, 2006 12:27:08 PM
> Subject: Re: Self-contained EAR
> 
> It worked nice with G 1.0, the problem report was in release phase of 1.1 so
> you could evaluate with G 1.0. The class loading problems will be fixed.
> 
> btw, I evaluated JBoss and JSAS and had a production system running on it,
> but I'm still here ;-)
> 
> Thanks,
> Mario
> 
> 
> gb.forums@yahoo.com wrote:
>> Super...
>>
>> The funny thing is that I'm evaluating Geronimo as a replacement for OC4J because of its class loading problems...  So should I switch to JBoss or GlassFish? :)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> GB
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Mario Ruebsam <mario.ruebsam@googlemail.com>
>> To: user@geronimo.apache.org
>> Sent: Friday, July 7, 2006 12:06:28 PM
>> Subject: Re: Self-contained EAR
>>
>> Hi Guillaume,
>>
>> it's a known issue, maybe theres a patch in the near future.
>>
>> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2125
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mario
>>
>>
>> Guillaume Bilodeau wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I gotta say I'm dumbfounded by how class loading with EARs works in Geronimo, although it is my first time dealing with that kind of issue (deploying a WAR to Tomcat is much simpler).
>>>
>>> According to this URL (http://www.chariotsolutions.com/geronimo/ejb.html) :
>>>
>>> "If the EJB JAR file is included in an application EAR, then Geronimo will respect Class-Path entries in the META-INF/MANIFEST.MF file of the EJB JAR. Any JARs referenced there should also be packaged within the EAR, and paths to JAR files will be resolved relative to the position of the EJB JAR file in the EAR. If the EJB JAR file is not included in an EAR, then manifest class path entries will be ignored. In either case, external libraries can also be placed in the Geronimo server repository and referenced with dependency elements in the Geronimo deployment plan (see Section 12.3.1, Customizing the Class Path)."
>>>
>>> My EAR contains an EJB JAR which includes a META-INF/MANIFEST.MF file, which does include the libraries that should be in the classpath.  However, those libraries are not found at runtime.  Here is my EAR's structure:
>>>
>>> promo-ear.ear
>>> + commons-*.jar
>>> + spring-*.jar
>>> + other-libraries.jar
>>> + promo-server.jar
>>>   + all-classes.class (including some EJB implementations - not interfaces)
>>>   + META-INF
>>>     + ejb-jar.xml
>>>     + MANIFEST.MF (containing a Class-path entry with references to libraries in the EAR, such as spring-*.jar without any path)
>>> + promo-api.jar
>>>   + all-ejb-interfaces.class (not implementations)
>>>   + META-INF
>>>     + MANIFEST.MF (with no Class-path entry)
>>> + promo-web.war
>>>   + all web content (JSP, CSS, JS, etc.)
>>>   + WEB-INF
>>>     + web.xml
>>> + META-INF
>>>   + application.xml
>>>   + MANIFEST.MF
>>>
>>> Somehow the Spring library is not visible since I get the following message:
>>>
>>> java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: org.springframework.context.support.ClassPathXmlApplicationContext in classloader default/promo-ear-2.0.0-snapshot_promo-web-2.0.0-SNAPSHOT.war/1152257080360/car
>>>
>>> Surely there must be a way to have a self-contained EAR, which can reference its own libraries.  How can this be done?
>>>
>>> Thanks a lot,
>>> GB
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>