Mail Archive Home | architecture List | June 2006 Index
| Date Index --> | Thread Index --> |
Hello,I'm forwarding to the architecture, college and executive-committee lists this message from three people who are Speedo supporters.
They were somewhat surprised that their message on the community mailing list was not followed by any reaction.
Even though the initial message was not really asking a question, but rather taking position, I feel that they were expecting some kind of reaction from ObjectWeb.
Does anyone has something to say/add ?
Please react !!
Regards,
alex
--
Alexandre Lefebvre
France Telecom, Research & Development, MAPS/AMS
28 chemin du Vieux Chene - B.P. 98
38243 Meylan CEDEX - France
phone: +33 4 76 76 45 63 - fax: +33 4 76 76 45 57
email: alefebvr@xxxxxxx
Begin forwarded message:
From: Roland Hedayat <roland@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 29 May 2006 09:51:39 GMT+02:00
To: speedo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, community@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [speedo] Speedo and ObjectWeb
Speedo and ObjectWeb
==============
The signers of this letter are representing consultancies,
currently using Speedo in health care applications together with
Jonas as well as standalone. The areas where OW solutions have
been applied by us are both safety and performance critical.
The end customer for our solutions is primarily the Stockholm
City Council, organizing the public health care of approximately
1.8 M inhabitants. Some of these solutions are even considered
for national health care projects in Sweden.
Three years ago, we were evaluating various open source
middleware solutions for use in a pilot system to be developed by
Stockholm City Council. For us, we had decided up front to make
use of an Object/Relational mapping solution, and preferably a
standard compliant one.
Our candidates boiled down to JBoss/Hibernate and JOnAS/(Speedo or
Hibernate).
For several reasons, we opted for JOnAS/Speedo. One reason of
particular weight was the fact that Speedo at the time was part
of the OW suite (thus giving us a kind of "one stop" offering)
and also compliant with a standard (JDO), while Hibernate was an
independent 3rd party product, not compliant with a standard.
So, the very existence of a good O/R mapping solution in the OW
suite of solutions was among the important factors in favour of
OW on our check list.
We chose JOnAS/Speedo, and we have not regretted it.
We came to be early users of Speedo, but the development team has
been extremely helpful both with technical advice, solving
problems, correcting bugs we found etc. The product is evolving
towards high reliability and performance. For us it is a key
component.
However, since the early days, things have happened:
* JDO did not become _the_ one and only standard for Java persistence,
it will coexist with EJB3.
* Hibernate is now part of the JBoss offering
* Hibernate is in the process of being standardized according to EJB3
Does this make Speedo a less important or interesting product for
ObjectWeb?
The reason for asking this question is that we have got the
feeling, based on some indications, that Speedo is not considered
a central, core part of the OW offering:
- When a new release of JOnAS is out, it is seldom synchronized
with the development of Speedo. In many cases one even has to
build the latest Speedo distro and integrate it manually into
JOnAS
- The Speedo development pace seems to have slowed down lately,
mabybe because of lack of resources
- There is little promotion of the Speedo component on the OW
site
Our answer to the above rethorical question is NO, for the
following reasons:
1. A good O/R mapping solution is increasingly important to
bridge the "semantic gap" between a good server side
architecture, based on OO principles, and the still prevailing
relational database.
2. If one has to go elsewhere to find this solution, then the
probability is much higher than one will find another solution
(than the OW-based one) altogether. Why, as a newcomer, choose
JOnAS and third party JBoss Hibernate rather than "one stop
shopping" a JBoss/Hibernate solution?
3. It is in many situations nice to have an O/R component which
is not bound to the EJB stuff, that is, can be used stand
alone where appropriate.
4. JDO2 is now a mature standard, and in some respects superior
to the EJB3 standard for persistence. The JDO2 standard will
probably continue to live for the foreseeable future, even if
the long term goal is to merge the two standards into one.
5. Speedo is one of the few Java persistence frameworks which will
support _both_ JDO2 and EJB3.
6. Speedo is in itself a showcase for the high quality
architecture and engineering so often found in OW components:
- Highly modularized by means of Fractal, reusing Perseus,
Medor, Jorm and relying on the ASM tools
- High performance
7. Maintaining an own O/R solution makes it easier to optimize it
for usage within JOnAS
After having used OW solutions to our and our customers
satisfaction, we actively promote ObjectWeb. For us, Speedo is a
central part of this, and we hope that the ObjectWeb Consortium
will continue to support Speedo, and also clearly promote it as a
first order citizen in the suite of solutions. It so deserves.
Mikael Karlsson
Creado Systems
Hans Höök
Höök Utveckling AB
Roland Hedayat
Inherit S AB
| Date Index --> | Thread Index --> |
Powered by MHonArc.
Copyright © 1999-2005, ObjectWeb Consortium | contact | webmaster.