We have an older installation running with NSB 2.0. I know NES is released for 2.5 but since it's just a layer on top I figure it should be possible to try NES with NSB 2.0. Also, for various reasons the customer does not want to upgrade NSB until it hits 3.0. So I'm evaluating using NES for this particular customer and it seems to compile and start up the samples alright.
But are there any compelling reasons not to use NES with NSB 2.0?
Werner
NES will work fine with NSB 2.0+
Event sourcing is just a pattern and it does not correlate with any particular messaging technology. NSB is hust a transport, you could even use some file-based message queues, RabbitMQ or Azure queues.
Related
I am working on designing a workflow with the intention of using cadence workflow engine and Java client. Seems like uber is actively using Go, and thus Go has better documentation and Activity and other classes than Java Client. Is this true?
No, it is not really true. The majority of the open source users of Cadence and Temporal are using Java SDK.
If you go the the java-client channel in Cadence slack, the community has more discussion than go-client. Even in Uber, Java-client is heavily used by core services like payments.
Go client happens to have more docs/samples because it started a little earlier. In fact, the docs that are missing in Java, could be derived from Go. It should be noted that there are more documents in Java library. For example, the documents of how to write unit tests, instead of putting in to cadenceworkflow.io, we put in
javadocs directly. Because this is the convention for Java developer to lookup documentation.
IMO they are the same important for Cadence. All the new features are implemented/rolling out at the same time hence they don't have real difference.
For the last few months my company has been using a product from a company called Informatica (previously AgentLogic) called RulePoint. This product has proven itself very easy to use with a well-developed and easy-to-use SDK for customization. The way we use the product for CEP is fairly trivial, we have 2 sources which we monitor for our rule data, the first being a JMS Queue, the second being a Jabber IM account. The product runs on any java-based application server (WebLogic, Tomcat, etc) and runs just about flawlessly.
Last week my boss says, "Hey, I've heard that we may be able to do the same thing we are doing with RulePoint with an open-source product called Drools. Check it out and let me know what you think."
I've heard of people using Drools for flow-based operations (validation, etc), however, I've never heard of anyone using their CEP product (Fusion) in practice. So, being the diligent worker, I have undertaken this task. I've downloaded all the files (version 5.0) and accompanying documentation and have started to read. I've read through just about all the docs and run most of the examples, but I still don't really see HOW drools works for CEP.
While there are examples for using Data (or Facts, I guess) from JMS, I don't see how this thing stays "running", continuously monitoring a queue until the application is actually stopped. RulePoint pretty must just sits and listens, however, Drools seems to not.
I could probably write a full-blown command-line application for our needs, however, I was hoping to leverage some of the benefits of using a application server provides.
I guess I'm looking for some good tutorials or an example of how someone is using Drools and CEP in production.
The CEP stuff is known as "Drools Fusion" - and what you probably want is "runUntilHalt" method to run and listen for event streams continuously.
I'm looking for a framework for agent interaction simulation, where I can deploy some agents and let them interact and watch their evolution.
Until now I found Terrarium 2.0 (http://terrarium2.codeplex.com/). In principle this is what I need: the ability to create some creature/agent and deploy it into a simulation framework where it will interact with other agents. But it seems that Terrarium is no longer under development.
Do you know of any similar frameworks which are worth considering?
Thanks.
I'd like to see Terrarium for VS 2010 myself. It's not under development anymore, but the source is released and is still functional. So I guess it can be updated and expanded if anyone has the time, I would if I had :) The public server is still online, but there are no peers online. Don't know of any similar frameworks, for .Net at least.
I have been sold on the fun of using linq in areas other than pure database interaction. (See Calling fellow code nerds - Alternatives to Nested Loops?).
We are stuck on 2.0. I have told the powers that be about the ease of updating to 3.5 (we have already migrated to VS2008) but they are wanting a list of "benefits" for upgrading.
Can those that have experience in 3.5 help provide some talking points for the benefits of updating an existing app to 3.5?
UPDATE: Found an additional reason: Microsoft's inclusion of Charting tools for Asp.Net as a patch on top of 3.5! They get their business value, I get the fun...
Can YOU make a case for it? Sounds like you want it because LINQ is fun. Other people are mentioning features that are fun. I've always had a problem selling fun features to management because they aren't very compelling reasons to potentially disrupt an environment.
Honestly, it really depends on what you are using C# for. Are you a web developer, system admin, something else? Taking a general approach, I would use the following selling points (you will need to do some work to prove these things):
Zero-disruption for end-users when upgrading. Upgrading to the new version will be seamless and we will have a thoroughly reviewed test plan for updating all clients to this version. All of our old applications that require .NET 1.x or .NET 2.0 will still work perfectly.
Programmer Efficiency. You could mention how more of the Windows API is wrapped by .NET classes, thus making programmer more efficient because they don't have to P/Invoke as much. LINQ makes your more productive because of x, y, and z. Lambda expressions make you more productive because of x, y, and z.
Ease pains of future OS migration. Moving to WPF now will prepare us for Vista/Windows 7. We won't have to migrate applications using the now deprecated "Windows Forms" to WPF, because we will already be using it.
More applications purchased from 3rd parties will require it, so we will have to upgrade sooner or later.
In the end, you need to prove that at the very least, this move will not cost you money in terms of increased support or testing costs. If you can show it will make you be more productive and it will be a rather painless switch, then you will get your wish.
Maybe you should talk to some Java developers who are probably still forced to develop using 1.3 or 1.4 despite 1.5 being out for over 3 years and 1.6 for a couple... it appears platform consistency across the business is often of greater importance than the benefits of using the latest and greatest.
Also remember that 3.5 is just additional BCL libraries. You are still running on CLR 2.0. Same is true for 3.0. Usually when people find out that the underlying framework is the same and that you are just adding in new libraries they are more likely to go along with it.
You don't need .NET 3.5 to get LINQ or C# 3.0 features. You can implement your own LINQ for .NET 2.0. I am using C# 3.0 all over the place in my .NET 2.0 application. I don't know the full details on how to start the conversion process because I didn't set it up myself. This might be a good link for you: http://www.danielmoth.com/Blog/2007/05/using-c-30-from-net-20.html.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms171868.aspx
Transitioning onto 3.5 would help you reap the benefits/ features of:
LINQ to (Entities/ XML / Objects / Datasets etc ).
WCF, WF and WPF.
ASP.net MVC where MVC is kind of a de facto standard in other
platforms like Ruby/Python which
allow you pure HTML/ Javacript based
development.
ORM options with ADO.net Entity
Framework/ Linq to Sql
4.
With a few addons you can have
support for dynamic languages
like
IronPython/IronRuby.
Oh ya I almost forgot ADO.net Data Services..one of my fav.
These are the few benefits that immediately come to my mind.
In my experience, the addition of LINQ and Extension methods alone have made many previously arduous and/or time consuming tasks much easier and faster. The increased developer productivity from that alone is worth the upgrade effort IMHO.
Lambda expressions are awesome. There is no end to the places where I find that lambda expressions help me out in a very concise and readable way.
Automatic properties, while being a simple concept, really help making the code base smaller and clearer.
Also, I sencond the extension methods.
Before I even opened this question I had my answer: LINQ - it's one of the greatest extensions ever in .NET - I love it. It took me a few days to figure out, but now I've got it, I use it all over the place. The ability to query collections and arrays is worth the upgrade alone in my mind.
Decreased development time (and therefore increased ROI)
Less time wasted finding workarounds for .NET bugs that've been fixed in newer releases.
Extension methods for native types (in a similar fashion to JavaScript prototyping)
LINQ extensions - they take a couple of days to get your head around, but it's awesome!
LINQ to XML makes working with XML so much simpler
LINQ to objects/collections
A nice new 3.5 poster from Microsoft that you can pin up in your cubicle.
As a manager if I have a happier more productive team that is producing more in less time, then its a no brainer.
Ask yourself this: Will the developers be more effective and will their increased productivity actually increase benefit to the company or reduce corporate costs once you've considered the upgrade/transition/installation on the servers/additional testing etc? If the answer is truly yes, then do the upgrade and quit arguing about it.
I have a client that's running an application based on JBoss 4.0.5, Seam 1.2 and RichFaces 3.0.1. Their system is having performance problems due to the fact that a lot of data is coming back from the server to be displayed on screen and it seems like the rendering of that data is taking forever. The data brought back is displayed in a tabbed interface, but the tabs aren't currently being loaded individually, but all at once.
I'm trying to build up a case to present to the client on the benefits of upgrading to never version of RichFaces, which, as I understand it, has added a great number of features related to tabbed panels and being able to use ajax to page the data and load the chunks you actually need to display at the moment, and not the rest that's in other tabs.
The move to a newer version of RichFaces will also result in never versions of Jboss and Seam, as the current production build of RichFaces 3.2.1 requires JSF 1.2.
IF anyone has some suggestions or experience on performance of current versions RichFaces, paging, etc, I would really appreciate some feedback.
I haven't noticed much of a performance improvement by upgrading through various Richfaces versions. You're better off optimizing the code that is involved in the rendering - for example checking whether code is called mutliple times (as is the case when logic is placed in a getter).
I've found the bean-timing interceptor (#MeasureCalls) that Tobias Hill outlines in the Seam forum to be absolutely fantastic - more so than a profiler for specific problems (probably less so if you don't know where to start looking). It lets me track down those methods that are called more often than required and allows me to streamline my beans.
The forum link is : http://www.seamframework.org/Community/SeamPerformanceProblemRewardingWorkaround
One warning... I recently upgraded to JBoss 5.1.0GA, JSF 1.2, etc... so that our software stays current, but there is a drawback. JBoss 5 uses -significantly- more memory than JBoss 4, and takes longer to start. It would be wise for you to test our your new configuration on one machine before attempting to switch system-wide.
Use a profiler and do it for yourself. Only you have the application. Only you know which combination of components are "slow". I think you can measure it for yourself very fast.
p.s. show us the results ,-)
I find the Apache implementation of JSF1.2 much better the the Apache implementation of JSF1.0. I use a little RichFace 3.2 and it seems fine, still a bit too much information being sent on the ajax requests from the client so RichFaces Ajax executes much slower then a hand crafted AJAX solution, but code very much faster in RichFaces.