Win a copy of Head First Android this week in the Android forum!

Alfred Ku

+ Follow
since Jul 30, 2010
Cows and Likes
Total received
In last 30 days
Total given
Total received
Received in last 30 days
Total given
Given in last 30 days
Forums and Threads
Scavenger Hunt
expand Ranch Hand Scavenger Hunt
expand Greenhorn Scavenger Hunt

Recent posts by Alfred Ku

It should be a network problem. Any proxy?
10 years ago
Thanks for this promotion. I am eager to learn more about EJB 3.1.
Thanks for your comments again.

In fact, our management team just leave me two options, JBoss or WebSphere.

Personally, I perfer JBoss and I have sufferred from IBM / Oracle consultant, and My Oracle Support (Metalink). I also know that most of those "experts" are just fresh graduates (in Hong Kong).

I am now preparing some information, and hopefully can consolidate Java experts' opinions to make a fair comparison between Websphere and JBoss, and submit it to our management team.

I think the discussion is very useful. Thanks again.
11 years ago
Thanks for your comments!

Please find my feedback as below.

In general, a load-balancer can prevent from getting service downtime, if there are two or more application servers. If not, Websphere should be better than JBoss.

Java Runtime:
Should java runtime be a factor for selecting application server for PRODUCTION use?

Developer tools:
The performance problem can be resolved by using a more powerful machine, where the cost is insignificant.

Developer performance:
Personally, the startup time of PRODUCTION server is not critical factor for determine which application server should be used.

Server performance/speed:
It is just a matter of using a more powerful machine.

Fail over:
It is just for insurance, and the application server (and its architecture) may indirectly imply the expected downtime. In fact, spending more money on hardware and software is hopefully minimizing the expected downtime.
Regarding to the "insurance", I have heard that IT manager dared not using JBoss or open-source, and it was because he could make complain to IBM/vendor, if the system was down.

WAS should be better for backup, as WAS provides an export feature to backup the configuration. In my case, our IT backup the whole image, including OS and application. Therefore, it is no difference for backing up either WAS or JBoss.

Lastly, I revise the formula as following
Cost = Hardware cost + Software cost - [expected downtime * penalty of downtime], where software cost = cost of purchasing license + cost of maintenance
11 years ago
I am looking for your opinions for JBoss or Websphere. Please help to comment.
11 years ago
Cost effectiveness is the key for selecting application server.

In my mind,
Cost = Cost of purchasing license + Cost of maintenance - [expected downtime * penalty of downtime]

Cost of purchasing license - Expensive
Cost of maintenance - Expensive
Expected downtime - rare

Cost of purchasing license - Less expensive
Cost of maintenance - Less expensive
Expected downtime - not frequent

The penalty of downtime is determined by the business nature of the deployed applications. For example, if a bank system is down or unstable, it will damage a company's reputation. This explains why the market of application server in financial section is dominant by IBM(WAS).

It should consider at least five areas.
1. System integrations with other applications (legacy systems, Java systems, NET systems)
2. Clustering and scalability
3. Server administration
4. Integration of development tools
5. Integration of testing tools

It is highlighting that system reliability and technical support (from IBM/Redhat) are not considered, and it is because it is treated as a factor of expected downtime. Moreover, I am not agreed about using certain Java framework would affect the decision of selecting application server. For example, it is true that Hibernate should work better in JBoss. However, it is not a point for using JBoss. Personally, the selection of application server is more important the selection of Java framework. It is because we may switch to another Java framework relatively easier.

For system integration, it depends on the overall system architectures in your company. In general, WAS provides better supports for connecting to legacy system.

For clustering and scalability, WAS is definitely better than JBoss.

For system administration, WAS is definitely better than JBoss. It is because WAS provide more documentations and a better UI for performing system configuration. However, in my personal experience, JBoss provides a more flexible way for configuration, provided that you should have more expert knowledge and take the risk! Moreover, it is seldom to do the administration if the application runs smoothly.

For development tools, WAS is a little better than JBoss, provided that you are willing to pay for WSAD.

For testing tools, if you are using Rational tools, you will have better experience for testing the system. I have a good experience for using RFT and RPT, which is also based on Eclipse platform, and is easy to use. However, they are many alternative testing solutions in the market, and it should be no difference if we do not use IBM products for performing testing.

In short, IBM spends lots of investment on WAS, such as documentation, integrated development tool and testing platform. WAS is more powerful than JBoss, and IBM let us work more efficient if we are using WAS and IBM products. However, are those "effectiveness" adding value to your business? Are you or your boss willing to pay for it? Is it cost effective?

Any comments?
11 years ago