Heinrich, With the embedded version of the server, Xindice is no longer an issue. My issue now is that I have everything designed to work with JMS. However, I am in the process of abstracting my Publish/Subscribe Interface to make it transport independent. At that time, I should be able to "drop in" any version of JMS, XmlBlaster or None. The "None" version uses an internal Publish/Subscribe without having to go over the wire.
Once, I can swap out my transport layer, then I will be interested in seeing how fast/reliable XmlBlaster is compared to some of the JMS implementations. I have high hopes for XmlBlaster :-). regards, Mark Heinrich G�tzger wrote: > On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Mark J. Stang wrote: > > [...] > >With the old version of Xindice, I had to have a seperate > >Xindice process running. So, I had a JMS Server, a > >Cybershop Server and Xindice Server all running. > >To make things more interesting, I used JBoss for my > >JMS server, a little overkill :-). By using the > >embedded version I can eliminate one process. With > >the elimination of the whole CORBA thing, I might be > >able to use XmlBlaster. > > You might be able to use it in these days as well. > xmlBlaster supports some SOCKET transport layer instead of CORBA. It might > even be faster. > > It seems that there is no other way around than this to avoid singleton > CORBA conflicts discussed here a year ago. > [...] > > cheers > > Heinrich -- Mark J Stang System Architect Cybershop Systems
begin:vcard n:Stang;Mark x-mozilla-html:TRUE adr:;;;;;; version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] fn:Mark Stang end:vcard
