我猜这个问题是关于运行时的环境,但仍然不明白什么是更轻的应用程序的意思.内存占用？启动时间？部署时间？你有什么问题？请定义光.
对于什么值得,我认为GlassFish 3是一个轻的运行时间,我的经验是非常积极的.从产品data sheet：
Oracle GlassFish Server 3 implements the OSGi runtime,which allows features to be dynamically added to the Java server as needed,and for the smallest possible Java stack to be deployed to support applications. This helps to keep the footprint as small as possible by loading only the modules required to service deployed applications—improving startup time and reducing resource utilization.
第二,我个人不喜欢Frankenstein的做法,I believe that the glue between all parts that you get with a real application server is part of the added value,这其实是为什么我使用一个应用服务器.
第三,我从来没有打过OpenEJB,我只用它进行测试,从来没有计划将其用于生产,主要是因为它的声誉不佳.参见comment关于Geronimo在TSS上的表演(来自Hani Suleiman,如果是苛性碱,不要惊讶)：
I’d imagine that saying that the EJB
tier is ‘acceptable’ is about the
nicest thing you could say.
From what I know,geronimo’s ejb code
is based off openEJB,which has,
historically,bean the worst container
you could possibly find. You’d have to
look pretty hard to find it too,only
to be filled with various degrees of
regret/rage once you achieve that
dubious goal.
It’s not surprising that G’s
performance will always be sub-par.
The frankenstein approach of software
building is a great recipe for bad
performance. Sure,you’ll have lots of
pretty diagrams,great looking
dependency graphs,and loose coupling.
All of which are fairly irrelevant to
users who want a coherent appserver
that they can treat as a black box.
事情可能已经改变,OpenEJB可能有所改善,至少有一点,但仍然有：
> OpenEJB不完全支持EJB 3.1.
> Tomcat OpenEJB仍然不是一个完整的Java EE实现,您可能还需要为您的生物添加一些部分(甚至不提Java EE 6).
>管理,集群等呢？
>如果您不需要完整的Java EE 6配置文件,那么就有Java EE 6 Web配置文件
>我对GlassFish 3感到高兴,我没有发现它很“沉重”(我建议尝试一下).
>我知道它可以表现很好.
由于所有这些原因,我不会考虑Tomcat OpenEJB而不是GlassFish,特别是如果没有问题要解决的话.
相关问题
> Which technologies does Tomcat support
> What is an Enterprise Java Bean really?
> Real world comparisons of Glassfish and JBoss 5?
也可以看看
> GlassFish 2 vs. Tomcat 6
> Putting GlassFish v3 in Production: Essential Surviving Guide
