• Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic

RMI over Sockets  RSS feed

 
vikasids sharma
Ranch Hand
Posts: 157
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi all

I m designing for a client server application in financial domain.
For interactions between client and server , let me know the constraints of RMI , if we go with RMI instead of using pure sockets to transfer data.

Thanks and regards
Vikas
 
Roger Chung-Wee
Ranch Hand
Posts: 1683
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Are you asking whether to choose between the RMI framework (straight RMI or EJB which uses RMI over IIOP) versus the Socket API? Well, sockets will be used anyway: for instance, the EJB stubs and ties will establish socket connections to communicate.

My understanding is that straight RMI is faster than EJB but might be slower than sockets. But it is not common to think like this in the design stage as issues such as transactions, security, messaging, scalability, etc can be important. If, say, you find that you need these in your application, then it would be hard to avoid the use of an EJB server.
 
vikasids sharma
Ranch Hand
Posts: 157
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Well Roger
I m talking of using pure RMI Framework. We are using core java for providing services (transaction,pooling,security,scaling). My question is that using RMI framework instead of pure sockets is advisable for data transfer from client to server in client(thick)-server application OR what are constraints on choosing RMI Framework instead of pure socket programing?

Originally posted by Roger Chung-Wee:
Are you asking whether to choose between the RMI framework (straight RMI or EJB which uses RMI over IIOP) versus the Socket API? Well, sockets will be used anyway: for instance, the EJB stubs and ties will establish socket connections to communicate.

My understanding is that straight RMI is faster than EJB but might be slower than sockets. But it is not common to think like this in the design stage as issues such as transactions, security, messaging, scalability, etc can be important. If, say, you find that you need these in your application, then it would be hard to avoid the use of an EJB server.
 
Roger Chung-Wee
Ranch Hand
Posts: 1683
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
We are using core java for providing services (transaction,pooling,security,scaling).

I don't understand what you mean by "core java". Surely you are using an EJB server for these services? After all, you are posting to an EJB forum.

My question is that using RMI framework instead of pure sockets is advisable for data transfer from client to server in client(thick)-server application OR what are constraints on choosing RMI Framework instead of pure socket programing?

Is there an issue in the client making EJB remote calls and passing the args as serializable objects? My understanding is that the EJB implementation of RMI is quite efficient.
 
vikasids sharma
Ranch Hand
Posts: 157
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I m posting this query just to know If we compare RMI(which is part of this forum)with pure sockets , what should be prefereable ?
We are not using application server.

Originally posted by Roger Chung-Wee:

Is there an issue in the client making EJB remote calls and passing the args as serializable objects? My understanding is that the EJB implementation of RMI is quite efficient.
 
  • Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
Boost this thread!