geronimo-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Xasima Xirohata <>
Subject Re: your current Geronimo evaluation
Date Wed, 04 Mar 2009 17:19:42 GMT
Boring note.

I have a little remark on the "easy" word in your test questions. I
think that this word DOES specify the aim of the comparing, so your
tests may be named as "the best server to start for newbie/common
task"-competition. But it's not very good to perform comparing ONLY
for newbies or for common projects.

For example, the "easy to install"-test supposes "is it easy to
install geronimo for regular needs". Yeap, it's easy. But nothing too
specific (or extreme) in comparing with the installation of other
products I think. Moreover, I would never take into account the
'simplicity of installation' since no something complex occurs in any
of them if no troubles start.

But just imagine, that some ports (RMI/services) are already busy, you
has misplaced your java-environment installation, you want to upgrade
server or specific parts, and so on. If it occurs I insist that, for
example, geronimo is much easy to tune or fix than ... (i can't
compare with jboss or glassfish now, so put what i know) ..regular IBM
WebSphere (not the community edition).

As for me, all servers are easy to install in normal circumstances,
but i don't know how easy to tune or fix JBOSS/Glassfish installation
if something goes wrong.

The next question is what actually you 're going to install easily. If
it's just common out-of-box server, it's not the problem for any of
them. But if you're in need to bundle your server with specific
services (change the web services implementation, change any of jee
SPINE services like JMS and so on), or even cut off most services to
reduce your server up to specific configuration (we just tried to
perform this some time ago when want to ship little server to run on
customer side with derby as db), then i think you probably need to
choose geronimo.
Geronimo tends to support different projects as parts and allow easy
substitution / reducing between them. As far as I know, it's better
for this purpose than others. JBoss and Glassfish used to avoid such
of reconfiguration as REGULAR, easy process, although they has hk2/
module architectures too.

Thus, on my point of view Geronimo is more easy to tune and configure,
more easy to fix. But if compare just an typical installation process
with no troubles or specific reasons occurs, then probably all of them
(and even an IBM WebSphere) do this process easily.


Geronimo allow deployment both from console, from web interface and
from IDE, although it's possible to monitor the server using maven
plugins. The same is for rest of servers (JBOSS/Glassfish). I don't
think that we need to compare which GUI is most easy to use to deploy.
It's interesting for me to compare the ability to manage dependencies
and services in complex projects. What's actually more easy to write
(specific plans) and use (manage): gbeans + geronimo repositories, hk2
+ repository, jboss and (?) osgi.

So it's not question to do simple things easy (since all of servers
comparatively simple), it's a question if it's possible to perform
complex things at all (with reasonable time or at least

Is it a question to do simple administration (JMX / Deployed
Application, Memory Consumption) easily? As for me the more
interesting question is how to monitor and manage an application
server in cluster environment what we can manage / administrate. If
it's possible to easily integrate server with predefined  monitoring
service (*).

6 (If you don't know what to do, IDE will not help)... I will mark 10
if even you don't sure exactly what to do, IDE will assist you


Agree with Juergen Weber

> 5 (geronimo deployment plans like this one are really, really difficult:
> the JEE standard parts are easy, the Java part of GBeans is easy, too.

(*) for example

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Aldian_00 <> wrote:
> Hi everybody
> I am currently working on a comparative study of Jonas, Jboss, Glassfish,
> Geronimo. For all technical questions, I already have the information on the
> internet, and those four are the only one application servers that can meet
> my needs. But I would like to know what do experienced user think about
> their ergonomy. For each of them, I am posting the same question on their
> respective forum. Please be honest and objective so that I can make a good
> comparison (even if for you Geronimo is clearly the best ;)).
> About Geronimo, what evaluation (please give a mark from 1=worst to 10=best)
> would you give concerning the following tests?
> * easy to install
> * easy deployment
> * easy administration
> * easy IDE interfacing
> * easy developement
> Feel free to comment about the others softwares if you know something about
> them.
> Thank You very much !
> --
> View this message in context:
> Sent from the Apache Geronimo - Users mailing list archive at

Best regards,
     ~ Xasima Xirohata ~

View raw message