Most of the replies to Jim's question seemed to favor HttpSession over a
Stateful Session Bean (SFSB). In some applications, I also agree that this
is the best approach. In a simple environment, an HttpSession is held in the
memory of the web server, therefore it is very fast. In those situations
when the HttpSession is clustered (either shared or duplicated) or
persistent, the speed advantages decrease.
Some other respondees propose keeping the state closer to the client for
speed. This argument begins to fall apart when those clients require access
to other resources, such as database servers, and more importantly EJB
servers. If an HttpSession object is holding multiple references to EJB
handles, you may want to consider a SFSB. Speed and efficiency is achieved
when the bulk of inter-process communication is reduced. This has little to
do with where state is maintained.
jim
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I am interested in peoples opinions on the relative advantages and
> disadvantages of servlett sessions and statefull session beans. I have
read
> many places that statefull session beans are inefficient, since they
> instantiate a bean that lives as long as a client does, and there is one
> per client.
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
