-
1. Re: Seam without EJB, AKA Seam with JavaBeans, why bother?
christian.bauer Apr 19, 2007 12:30 PM (in response to grettke_spdr)Yes, it's all marketing.
Seriously though, you use whatever works for you. If you don't need EJBs, use JavaBeans. If you need EJBs, use them. Isn't it nice that both component types work with Seam? -
2. Re: Seam without EJB, AKA Seam with JavaBeans, why bother?
stu2 Apr 19, 2007 12:56 PM (in response to grettke_spdr)Looks to me like the biggest losses when not using EJB are the conversational stuff around SFSB and the JMS tie-ins. Neither are essential though. Seam without this stuff is very much intact.
-
3. Re: Seam without EJB, AKA Seam with JavaBeans, why bother?
christian.bauer Apr 19, 2007 1:15 PM (in response to grettke_spdr)Asynchronous processing also requires EJB (timers).
-
4. Re: Seam without EJB, AKA Seam with JavaBeans, why bother?
christian.bauer Apr 19, 2007 1:16 PM (in response to grettke_spdr)Oh, and of course you definitely want EJBs if you have to run your conversations in a cluster, because SFSBs provide all the necessary machinery for replication of state.
-
5. Re: Seam without EJB, AKA Seam with JavaBeans, why bother?
gavin.king Apr 24, 2007 6:03 PM (in response to grettke_spdr)Actually Seam JavaBean components are reasonably efficient in a cluster. We have built some optimized stuff on top of HttpSession replication.