> I have one session bean driving two entity beans on the same machine
> and the EJB configuration allows me to put the Beans in the
> same server.
This is the "standard" configuration.
>
> What are the benefits to be derived or losses incurred :-
>
> a. if three beans should be contained in the same EJB-Server
This is the baseline.
>
> b. if the Session Bean was to be in one EJB-Server whilst the
> two entity
> beans in another.
Problems:
- Calls from the session bean to the entity beans result in network round
trips
- Maintaining transaction semantics will cause two phase commit and/or
additional network traffic
- An additional point of failure
- Possibly unbalanced load
>
> c. If all three Beans where to reside in separate EJB-Servers.
Problems:
- Calls from the session bean to the entity beans result in network round
trips
- Maintaining transaction semantics will cause two phase commit and/or
additional network traffic
- Two additional points of failure
- Possibly unbalanced load
Possible benefits:
- Balance the load on many machines. Traditionally, this is achieved by
putting all beans on all machines, and letting an external load balancer
select one of them.
- Avi
--
And now for something completely different.
===========================================================================
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".
