It seems to me in WebSphere that it's just ridiculously complex. It takes hours and hours and hours to install, uninstall, apply fixpacks, etc. IBM seems to think that they can make it as complex as they like, and just hide it all behind WSAD, but even WSAD can't keep up with it. The feature set is about the same as everyone else, but the code is much larger and slower.
Overall, I think the complexity of it is too much for "regular" developers. I've seen converted ASP and COBOL developers trying to figure out the latest "ObjectNotSerializableException" or "InvalidStateException" with no other explanation. Some features, like the entity-relational mapping editor, are fantastic when they work, but if there's a problem, you're likely in for hours or days of h*ll. > Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 21:30:18 +0100 > From: Juan Pablo Lorandi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Juan: what's up with WebSphere CMP? > > Nothing, if you can afford an AS/400 to host your simple blog > application. :-) > > It's full of server dependant quirks (which I don't like but I can live > with, as many are "deployment" issues), the main reason is: it's > unnecesary SLOW, I'd say because the transition from a native app server > to one that's 100% java hasn't completed in version 4. That's what > ultimately yields monsters such as: > > "Look, Ma, No EJBs!": > https://www6.software.ibm.com/reg/devworks/dw-db2-dabeans-i?S_TACT=103AM > W61&S_CMP=GR&ca=dgr-lnxw06EJBsNOT > > It's not a bug, it's a feature!!!! (The article has been rewritten to > match WAS 5, but IBM produced many such pearls in the past). > > WAS 5 seems improved, but many if not most WAS users are still stuck > with version 3.5x. There's no CMP Entity support there. So most people > coding against WAS are stuck with DAOs either by choice or legacy. Sure, > support for EJB 1.1 CMP was there in WAS 4, but of course optimizations > weren't present so for non-trivial apps you'd have N-reads behavior, > syncronization problems, etc. When applications were complex, the server > would lower its performance tremendously. This behavior wasn't as > noticeable in many other app servers which were limited by the same > spec. > > I haven't been able to play with WAS 5 yet (it's been out since March, > so real-life-production-experience is scarce), I'm eager to see how it > performs. It seems that administering the server has been greatly > improved, which is a point going for IBM. > > So, a lot of people coding against Websphere must do it on pre v5 > version, have reading materials like the one above, and many tried the > EJB way, and hit their face against concrete. The result: by far, most > applications using EJBs on top of WAS do not use Entity Beans at all, > and wouldn't work if they did. > > That's what bothers me the most: since their product can't get it right > doing it the standard way, they came up with the IBM-way, and sold > it(with these "articles") to people as if it was some new groundbreaking > technology. Now that they can do it the standard way, nobody thinks of > their product to implement standard apps, while I still get my mailbox > filled with mails with "EJB" and "overhead" in the subject line. > > When WAS 3 was released, EJB 1.1 had been published for almost a year > (enforcing Entity Beans CMP support). Oracle's AS was worse at the time > (No Entity Beans AT ALL), but they cleaned up their act. Maybe WAS 5 is > when IBM cleans up their act. > > My 2c, > > Juan Pablo Lorandi > Chief Software Architect > Code Foundry Ltd. > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ==========================================================================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".
