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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
