jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexander Klimetschek" <aklim...@day.com>
Subject Re: RMI vs. JNDI
Date Tue, 17 Jun 2008 12:08:26 GMT
Don't know about performance differences between of a pure RMI lookup
vs. a JNDI lookup (although JNDI is recommended, because it is the
standard in J2EE systems), but anyway it will only affect the *lookup*
of the Repository interface. Once you have done that in your startup
code, you'll never need to do a lookup again in your application. If
you do remoting, you will be using RMI starting from there, for
getting Sessions and doing all the JCR API calls.


On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 1:58 PM, krisNog <kris.glover@bluenog.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> Thanks for the reply. I understand the fundamental difference between the
> two but I'm more concerned with performance. If you look at the
> jackrabbit-webapp the local.jsp/remote.jsp describe how performance is "much
> better" using a local lookup such as within container context or through
> local JNDI where-as using RMI to look up is recommended as a last resort. My
> question is what does "significantly better" mean? I understand that RMI has
> capabilities that JNDI alone does not but what penalty would I incur if I
> chose to use RMI even if I didn't absolutely require the remoting
> capability. Keeping in mind that everything I will be accessing will be from
> within the context of web-containers.
> Alexander Klimetschek wrote:
>> Hi,
>> you misunderstand JNDI. It is just a directory service for looking up
>> objects, not a remoting protocol. RMI however is both a remoting for
>> Java (what you mean) and offers a simple way to address these remote
>> objects. JNDI is supposed to be a superior directory API, eg. it can
>> also address underlying RMI objects among other things. But only RMI
>> is a remoting interface which is available in Jackrabbit. Where did
>> you read about a performance difference?
>> Regards,
>> Alex
>> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 4:08 AM, krisNog <kris.glover@bluenog.com> wrote:
>>> I have a question regarding best practices. According to the Jackrabbit
>>> documentation JNDI is preferred over RMI for performance reasons.
>>> However,
>>> I've noticed many Jackrabbit users still opt to use RMI. I understand RMI
>>> can be used in remote situations where JNDI cannot be used but other then
>>> that what is the tradeoff if any between RMI and JNDI? Historically, I
>>> understand RMI is slower then JNDI but does that paradigm still stand or
>>> has
>>> RMI performance increased enough to be comparable to JNDI? specifically
>>> when
>>> dealing with large Jackrabbit repositories?
>>> Thanks for any insight
>>> Kris
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://www.nabble.com/RMI-vs.-JNDI-tp17876722p17876722.html
>>> Sent from the Jackrabbit - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> --
>> Alexander Klimetschek
>> alexander.klimetschek@day.com
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/RMI-vs.-JNDI-tp17876722p17891000.html
> Sent from the Jackrabbit - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Alexander Klimetschek

View raw message