Perf are not the same for sure but the advantage is to not go through HTTP layer:
- control of threads - control of state "as usual" etc... local is the more enhanced version of the embedded behavior arquillian promotes. Servlet reaches 80% only of it with arq 1.x - which is already insane but sometimes tests are easier to write without these contraints. Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber <http://www.tomitribe.com> 2015-10-05 5:13 GMT-07:00 Alex Soto <asot...@gmail.com>: > But what is the advantage of using local instead of http? I am sure that > the performance is going to be pretty similar. > > El dl., 5 oct. 2015 a les 14:01, Romain Manni-Bucau (< > rmannibu...@gmail.com>) > va escriure: > > > You can see it the opposite as well ie you go through http where you can > > not desire it. > > > > 50-50 case i think. > > Le 5 oct. 2015 13:52, "John D. Ament" <john.d.am...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > > > > The fundamental problem (if I had to guess) is that let's say I'm > > testing a > > > REST API (heck even using the REST extension), persistence extension > > > doesn't know that my request went through since I'm controlling it, so > > its > > > call backs won't take effect. By running embedded, you're more likely > to > > > not be inside the same transaction, which is one of the things being > > banked > > > on I'm sure. > > > > > > John > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 3:26 AM Alex Soto <asot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > If there are bugs/improvements let s do it. I am thinking in terms of > > > doing > > > > the life of developers easier and in fact changing the protocol to > > > servlet > > > > dos not introduce (a priori) any back incompatibility but a lot of > > > > extensions are going to work with embedded mode. > > > > > > > > Alex. > > > > > > > > El dg, 4 oct 2015 a les 7:53 Romain Manni-Bucau < > rmannibu...@gmail.com > > > > > > va > > > > escriure: > > > > > > > > > Hi Alex > > > > > > > > > > Local protocol allows nicer start so very tempted to keep it like > > that. > > > > > Servlet protocol has few bugs/issues and is not what you target by > > > > default > > > > > with embedded adapters IMO. > > > > > Le 4 oct. 2015 01:25, "John D. Ament" <johndam...@apache.org> a > > écrit > > > : > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Alex, > > > > > > > > > > > > To be honest, I find the protocol section of arquillian the most > > > > > confusing > > > > > > for new users to pick up. Why should they care what the protocol > > > > > > transferring the test data is using? I remember at the > beginning, > > > AS7 > > > > > had > > > > > > a JMX protocol. This made tons of sense, since it didn't impact > > the > > > > > > running application. No one understood why their tests stopped > > work > > > > > > though! Truth be told, the fact that most people end up relying > on > > > > > > servlet, without even realizing that its the arquillian runtime > > > > starting > > > > > an > > > > > > HTTP request makes it confusing to understand scope. Basically, > > > users > > > > > end > > > > > > up relying on the servlet protocol to start their HTTP request > for > > > > them, > > > > > > instead of starting an HTTP request for their test invocation. > > > > > > > > > > > > Just curious, is this out on discourse somewhere? I can continue > my > > > > whine > > > > > > fest there :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > John > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 4:58 PM Alex Soto <asot...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello mates, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I send this email to start a discussion for a change on TomEE > > > > > Arquillian > > > > > > > Adapter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The other day, because of the book (Arquillian In Action), I > > > checked > > > > > the > > > > > > > protocol used by different adapters. I noticed that only Weld > > > adapter > > > > > and > > > > > > > TomEE embedded adapter are using the local protocol,all other > > ones > > > > are > > > > > > > using the Servlet 3.0 protocol. And maybe you are asking why > this > > > is > > > > > > > important? Well the problem is that a lot of extensions > requires > > > this > > > > > > > protocol to work, for example Arquillian Persistence extension > or > > > > > > Arquillan > > > > > > > Warp extension. In case a user wants to use embedded TomEE and > > one > > > > > > > extension that requires servlet protocol, it would get a > cryptic > > > > > > exception. > > > > > > > Of course there is a workaround and it is overriding the > default > > > > > protocol > > > > > > > by using protocol special tag in arquillian.xml and adding the > > > > > > > servlet-protocol dependency. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think that it would be easier for everyone if all adapters > > works > > > in > > > > > the > > > > > > > same way. With the release of TomEE 7 I think it could be a > good > > > > > > > opportunity to make this change in the Arquillian embedded > > adapter > > > as > > > > > > well > > > > > > > and align with the rest of the containers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The change to be done is very simple in terms of code (Adding > one > > > > > > > dependency and change one String of the adapter). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you think? From the point of view of Arquillian > community > > > it > > > > > > would > > > > > > > be the logic step. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alex. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
