Hello, Thank you all for many helpful answers! I have checked ERJGroupsSynchronizer and JGroup. And I have considered hours and searched more hours. And I found open terracotta. http://www.terracotta.org/<http://www.c2b2.co.uk/iPoint/ipoint?SelectedPage=69&110ArticleID=15> http://www.c2b2.co.uk/iPoint/ipoint?SelectedPage=69&110ArticleID=15
I think WO is the best tool but EO is not for everyone. When I try to find developers for WO other than me,it was difficult or high cost. People who can select to learn WO or EO is very limited.This is contrast to PHP. That is why I am trying to find some solutions to enhance WO. My current project is just a cross migration from pure server side or data models into web. So I am afraid that using EO may not be the best solution. (I have a mac but it is not my main machine. so I will never upgrade WO from 5.2) Don't you think terracotta's approach can enhance WO significantly with or without EO? I think Tools of WO and structures are still the best but EO is not the best today. I think EO's approach is delaying to the latest. I don't want to use additional mechanism or lock-unlock management just to increase instances or multiple requests. If Apple don't replace it and I don't have enough time to learn wonder I have to replace EO with something. >Why? EOF rocks. I think 1) Having caches for each instance is not efficient. Sharing cache is the best. 2) Developers today have to learn many things so learning vendor-closed technology is not for everyone. 3) EOF may use String and Hashtable for many internal processes.This may slow the app. I want a compact-transparent solution to be learned in a short time. > Why not just use Tapestry and some other frameworks? Because I don't like XML and servlet. And I like WO's tools:-) Best regards, Ken 2008/11/23 Chuck Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On Nov 22, 2008, at 6:01 PM, dododo2020 dododo2020 wrote: > > Hello, >> >> My name is Ken. It is my first post to this list. >> I had searched many solutions before and Thank you for this list. >> >> I have a question about WO app's instances and their integrity. >> >> I am considering to process multiple http requests by multiple instances >> of WO app. >> >> Each instance can (and should in most cases) be configured to process > multiple simultaneous requests. The simultaneous part becomes single > threaded at the point of changes to the object store (usually associated > with database access). > > When I update some data in db from one instance,the changes can be updated >> automatically for all the instances? >> Or should I notify something to other instances of same app and fetch >> fresh data manually? >> >> This situation can be occured when developing a site with multiple >> instances and admin app for the site. >> The integrity through the instances are maintained atuomatically by >> WebObjects? >> If it is maintained automatically,is it true for WO app without session >> ids in URL and with the ids in cookie? >> >> The location of the IDs has no effect on this. > >> Could anyone answer my questions? >> >> By the way I think WO can still be a main stream tool for Java developers >> if WebObjects's core could be opensource >> >> I can confidently assure you that this will not happen. > > or replaced by other DAO tool easily and stably. >> >> Why? EOF rocks. I have looked at the other tools and none offer a > compelling advantage over WO. One of the real benefits of WO is that is is > single source from end to end. There is no need to use frameworks to glue > frameworks together to achieve your goals. It is sane, consistent, and > mostly free of surprises. > > > If managing graphs of data and locks are required I would like to do >> without EnterpriseObject. >> >> Again, why? You are discarding the _best_ part of WebObjects! Why not > just use Tapestry and some other frameworks? > > I think Implementing WO app with opensource DAO can be productive and >> high-performence today. >> >> Uh, it is productive and high performance as it is. Adding an open > source DAO will only serve to make it worse. > > But I would like to use current code by EnterpriseObject if I don't need >> to manage the integrity of instances manually. >> >> > > Chuck > > > -- > Chuck Hill Senior Consultant / VP Development > > Practical WebObjects - for developers who want to increase their overall > knowledge of WebObjects or who are trying to solve specific problems. > http://www.global-village.net/products/practical_webobjects > > > > > > >
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
