remote versus local interfaces

m.andrews Aug 25, 2003 8:07 PM

i understood from marc fleury's "blue paper" that its possible to use remote ejb interfaces yet retain the high performance of the local interface, if you're operating in the same vm as the jboss server. (top of page 6 in the pdf document). apparently, the jboss server avoids serialization and rmi in this case?

could anybody elaborate on this? that would mean, then, that one could avoid using the local interface at all and as a result write more flexible code that at some point could be distributed (rather than co-located) - right?

if anybody has links to documentation or articles mentioning this, that would also be appreciated.

mike

1. Re: remote versus local interfaces

jonlee Aug 25, 2003 9:24 PM (in response to m.andrews)

When running in-VM the remote interface mechanism also provides for object sharing as a consequence of not performing serialization and transport. So the objects created by your EJB processes are exactly the same in-memory objects that your other client components use (typically your servlets/JSPs). There is still a performance impact on using remote instead of local interfaces. as with everything, YMMV. But you can have a look a the results we obtained while measuring changes in performance under varying conditions. See http://www.amitysolutions.com.au/downloads/JBoss_code.pdf. You need to assess these things for yourself though.
Actions