I know there are lots of options out there, and sorry to ask such a similar question again, but it's different enough to warrant it -- I think. I have one Java app, let's call it the "master", that will do some work, and then it needs to inform other Java apps in other JVMs about it. Today they are on the same machine, but this will not always be the case.
I'd prefer something that has an easy way to add/remove listeners (i.e., other JVMs), etc...so RMI or Web Services are not suitable as there'd be too much manual coding there to look after who is what, etc.
I'd also like the ability to add new Java apps (again, in other JVMs obviously) to the master's 'notify list', whatever it may be, without much effort -- preferably without needing to rebuild the master app.
What I'd really like is an easy messaging/communication framework, which requires some simple configuration.
I'm overwhelmed by the amount of frameworks and options out there...JMS, jgroups, the various MQ frameworks, RMI, Jini, etc, Web Services.
I'm looking for fast, simple, reliable, and easy! Any suggestions? I don't need complex or particularly advanced features.
Your master will have to be a server which is always available and the clients will have to register/unregister.
Maybe you can have a look at http://mina.apache.org/mina-project/userguide/ch2-basics/sample-tcp-server.html
Mina is also integrated in the Apache Camel project. (warning: Camel is a very addictive framework. The risk exists you will try to use it for all your future background processing :)
Related
I need to implement a distributed XMPP MuC application on the lines of XEP-0289 minus some of the features, in essence I want to have a bare bones implementation of the plugin, my concern is to address fault-tolerance and as of now I do not want to worry about the performance considerations as specified in 289.
I have looked into SleekXmpp as a tool to develop server side plugins, but don't know how comfortable it would be to use it for such an implementation, other options I have looked at are OpenFire , Tigase. I am comfortable with Python/Java and other key features to consider would be good documentation, ease of use etc keeping that in mind I would like to know what would be the preferred path to take for this development.
Any guidance will be appreciated.
you should be able to write a MUC component that includes FMUC (or similar). The general way to do this would be to use a library that supports XEP-0114 components (e.g. SleekXMPP (Python), Swiften (C++)) and implement MUC+FMUC through that. You haven't said what your concerns with SleekXMPP are, but it's a fairly well-respected library in the XMPP community, so seems a fair choice (I'd pick Swiften, but I'm biased as one of the authors).
Your second option (patching the server directly) isn't generally the XMPPish way of adding customisations (as it's vendor-specific), but should also work if you can find someone sufficiently familiar with the server code, or if you're willing to become so.
To achieve fault tolerance (assuming you mean resilience to server failures) you'd need to run your XMPP server clustered, and also cluster your FMUC implementation. With that done, the usual XMPP fail-over using SRV records in DNS should ensure other servers retry connections to another host.
On a side note, the next version of FMUC (XEP-0289) will have some of the features of the current revision stripped out, and a number of improvements made based on deployment experience, so if your work is not time-critical, it might be of benefit to you to read that when it's released. I also note that there exists at least one implementation of FMUC already (Isode's M-Link, on which I work), and there is interest from other vendors, so using the standard protocol might benefit you in terms of not re-inventing the wheel.
We are trying to be forward looking in our architecture choice on some of the new systems we are designing. Pretty much we want to architecture back end system that no matter what interface we decide to use (WinForms, Silverlight, MVC, Webforms, WPF, IOS (IPad/Iphone), ect...) which i believe just screams REST. Our organization generally will only use Microsoft APIs but since i have no idea when WCF-Web-Api will be released and we want to get started soon it looks like we have no other choice.
We want to take baby steps here to increase the chances of buy off. So we don't want to have to set up another server with IIS.
In the foreseeable future we will only be using WinForms & WebForms. What i was thinking we could use Nancy on the local machine but communicate with it in a RESTFul way. That way in the future it should be as simple as setting up a server and redirecting all the clients to that server rather than locally.
I've never used either NancyFX or OpenRasta, but, from what ive heard, it sounded like a good fit.
So the questions are:
Is the way i'm thinking on approaching this a good approach
Does it sound like NancyFX or OpenRasta would be a better fit?
Any reason why we should wait for WCF-Web-API and if so does anyone have an approx release date.
OpenRasta was built for resource-oriented scenarios. You can achieve the same thing with any other frameworks (with more or less pain). OpenRasta gives you a fully-composited, IoC friendly environment that completely decouples handlers and whatever renders them (which makes it different from MVC frameworks like nancy and MVC).
I'd add that we have a very strong community, a stable codebase and we've been in this for quite a few years, we're building 2.1 and 3.0 and our featureset is still above and beyond what you can get from most other systems. Compare this to most of the frameworks you've highlighted, where none have reached 1.0.
Professional support is also available, if that's a deciding factor for your company.
But to answer your question fully, depending on your scenario and what you want to achieve, you can make anything fits, given enough work. I'd suggest reformulating your question in terms of architecture rather than in terms of frameworks.
I have been trying to decide if my web project is a candidate for implementation using PSGI, but I don't really see what good it would do for my application at this stage.
I don't really understand all the fuss. To me PSGI seems like a framework that provides a common interface between different Apache modules which lets you move your application between them. e.g Easily move your application from running on mod_perl to fastcgi, and provide the application support for running on both options.
Is that right, or have I missed something?
As I and the team I am a part of not only develop the application, but also pretty much do maintenance and setup of servers I don't see the value for us of being able to run on fastcgi, cgi, and mod_perl, we do just fine with just mod_perl.
Have I misunderstood the PSGI functionality, or is it just not suitable for my project?
Forget the Apache bit. It's a way of writing your application so that the choice of webserver becomes less relevant. At $work we switched to Plack/PSGI after finding our app running with very high CPU load after upgrading to Apache2 - benchmarking various Apache configs and NYTProf'ing were unable to determine the reason, and using PSGI and the Starman webserver worked out much better for us.
Now everything is handled in one place by our PSGI app (URL re-writes, static content, expiry headers, etc) rather than Apache configuration, so it's a) Perl, and b) easily tested via our standard /t/ scripts. Also our tests are now testing exactly what a user sees, rather than just the basic app itself.
It may well not be relevant to you if you're happy with Apache and mod_perl, and I'm sure others will be able to give much better answers, but for us not having to deal with anything Apache-related again is such a relief in itself. The ease of testing, and the ability to just stick in a Data::Dumper and see what's going on rather than wrestling with ModRewrite and friends, is a great boon.
Borrowing from a recent blog post by chromatic, Why PSGI/Plack Matters (Testing), here's what it is:
It's a good idea borrowed from Python's WSGI and Ruby's Rack but made Perlish; it's a simple formalizing of a pattern of web application development, where the entry point into the application is a function reference and the exit point is a tuple of header information and a response body.
That's it. That's as simple as it can be, and that simplicity deceives a lot of people who want to learn it.
An important benefit is, ibid.,
Given a Plack application, you don't have to deploy to a web server—even locally—to test your application as if it were deployed … Plack and TWMP (and Plack::Test) use the well-defined Plack pattern to make something which was previously difficult into something amazingly easy. They're not the first and they won't be the last, but they do demonstrate the value of Plack.
Started wrote an answer and after 50 lines I deleted it. Simply because it is impossible tell (in short) why is PSGI extremely cool. I'm new in PSGI too, but zilion things now are much easier as before in my apache/mod_perl era.
I can give you next advices:
read the Plack advent calendar - all days, step-by-step. You must understand the basic philosophy, what is good on onions and so on... :)
search CPAN for "Plack::Middleware::" - and read the first few lines in each. Here are MANY. (Really should be somewhere some short overview for each one, unfortunately don't know any faster way. Simply it is good to know, what middlewares are already developed. (For example, you sure will need the Plack::Middleware::Session, or Plack::Middleware::Static and so on...)
read about Plack::Builder (already done, when you done with the advent calendar) :)
try write some apps with it and will find than Plack is like the first sex - now you didn't understand that you could live without it.
ps:
If was here something like "Perl Oscar", will sure nominating MyiagavaSan. :)
I want to try developing an XMPP server component using XEP-0114: Jabber Component Protocol.
Which server do you recommend and why? I'm talking about ease of development, community support, documentation, examples, etc.
That's a hard question to answer, because I doubt there are many developers involved in developing across multiple XMPP projects and languages.
I can throw out a few personal perceptions but... I could be off-base!
What you're really looking for is which libraries would be recommended for component development. All the servers support the component protocol, so all you really need is a socket connection to the server and some helper routines to make the repetitive stuff like message parsing easier.
Where the server might matter is if you need tighter integration.
For example if you want your component to scale the same way as Ejabberd then you'll probably want to use exmpp.
If you need to deploy your component alongside Openfire into Java only enterprises, then you'll probably want to use smack.
If you are familiar with Python and want to prototype quickly use Wokkel.
I don't think documentation is going to be great for any of the libraries (haven't looked at them all though!) but that shouldn't be a huge burden. All you really need a good book on how the XMPP protocol works and then some sample code from the library and it's fairly easy to move on from there.
For an easy-to-use testing server I like openfire. Good instructions, easy to hook in components, and a good web interface for administration. Debugging is more of a "tail -f" on the logfiles, slightly java-ish.
I've used XCP professionally, but that's really for commercial use. It works well but if that's not your target deployment it's not worth the effort. I'm not sure if you can buy it separately any more.
I tried using ejabberd and I gave up quickly. I found the documentation for setup and administration awful. The config files are not self describing and there's no good walk through on the ejabberd site. It may be able to even fry my eggs in the morning for breakfast, but I couldn't get past install with the time I'd allotted to it.
For Openfire, there is something called Whack, which is a Java library for creating server components (XEP-0114).
Since the communication is over sockets, I presume the same code should work for any well designed XMPP server (such as ejabberd). However, I have only tested it with Openfire and it works quite well.
If you were going to start building web sites as a consulting business on the side -- keeping your day job -- and you also had a toddler and a wife, what frameworks/tools would you pick to save you typing?
Any language.
I'm looking for a productivity superstar stack that won't tie my hands too much when I have to update the site 6 months later, or "evolve" the data model once in production.
It needs to allow me to say "yes" to the client: community features, CMS, security, moderation, AJAX, ...
I would suggest Django. Super simple to get something up and running really quick. You are using Python which has a large library to go with it. For me Ruby on Rails would be a close second.
I'd probably look at DotNetNuke. Its easy to set up (a lot of hosts will do it for you) and easy to use and put together a custom site that business's will be able to maintain in the future.
Its fairly easy to create custom modules that are specific to a business and hundreds of modules for sale (or free) that can be integrated into DNN for special uses.
Take a look at Microsoft's Sharepoint server if you'd like a pre-made framework with many options for plugging in your own code. Sharepoint is kind of a world unto itself but it is a very powerful environment.
Update: I'm surprised to have been voted down on this one. Keep in mind that the questioner specifically requested frameworks that included a CMS. Sharepoint meets this criteria - unlike straight .NET or other web development frameworks.
If you are going to vote the entry down, I think you owe it to the person who asked the question to explain why you don't think he should not even explore it as an option. You could be right - collective wisdom is what voting on SO is all about. But without an explanation, we don't know why you think you are right.
My answers are going to revolve around the .NET stack.
Use Master pages and CSS templates. This makes it so much easier to pop in a new look and feel for your customer.
For sure I'd include the Dynamic Data framework in the .NET world.
Hosting might become an issue for your customer. Questions around managing email addresses, procedures on how to quickly update the website to include the new contact phone number (different for each customer, I'd assume) Consider getting a reseller account on your favorite webhost, and dole out webhosting accounts as appropriate. There are lots of issues around this point. It may turn out to be a nice source of recurring revenue.
Build yourself a few patterns including a database wrapper which would handle all your data calls (i.e. a dll which wraps all your data calls, sets up your ADO.NET objects, runs your sproc calls, and picks up the connstring from app.config or something similar.)
This goes a long way to maintainability as well.
I would recomend going with anything MVC in a language you can undertand! Theres a couple of CMS's in python, php and ruby using that design and well... that allows you to be ready for combat for Ajax and expanding anything very fast.
This is definitely not a question that can be answered.
I prefer asp.net webforms because I think it allows for extremely rapid web app development, but I am sure you will receive recommendations for:
asp.net mvc
Ruby on Rails
PHP and some framework
Python and some framework such as Django
I believe PHP has the most pre-built apps that you can use, though asp.net also has the things you are looking for.
All of these platforms and frameworks can do what you want.
Choose between Rails and Django. They both have different strengths. I like Rails better in general, but Django's admin interface can save you a lot of time when you need it.
There's another factor to take into consideration here: what are you the most familiar with? I believe that some studies have found upwards of a 30% loss of productivity when trying to learn a new language/framework.
Sometimes, there's nothing wrong with just sticking to what you know. But if you're interested in what languages/frameworks to learn, I'll refer you to the other posts because the above was the only thing I really have to add.
I recommend looking into Grails. It uses Groovy which is similiar to Java (so if you know this already you're good to go). Groovy runs on the JVM so you can still use all the great libraries already available for Java. Yet, since it's a dynamic language with a lot of the similar bells and whistles like Ruby you can use closures and that kind of neat stuff when you need/want to. And you're not slowed down by Java's traditonal slow compile-deploy-test development cycle.
Grails is already setup with Hibernate and Spring. You can create CRUD application in practically no-time (pretty much like Rails applications), and at the same time drill down and be able to control every little details since it's built on such proven and well-supported technologies. In addition there's literally hundreds of plugins available that helps you easily set up things like mailing lists, security, AJAX components and so on.
Otherwise, if you want to set up a community site and don't want to code a single line you could always check out ning.com.