4:36 p.m.
I like the vision. I'll need to read all this again and think it through, but I do
have a couple of immediate questions and thoughts.
Has there been any discussion concerning how these changes effect the attractiveness
embedded of Teiid? I'm concerned that it will be less attractive in OEM
opportunities, and not necessarily in any specific technical sense, but that it's more
'heavyweight' because it requires a container.
I know you mentioned JBJCA for future embedded deployments, can that replace all the
services of the container or our current implementations, or would there be some loss of
functionality?
I need to read up on JCA, but there are some unique connection management concerns with
the SalesForce connector (close one and they all close) that might have to be resolved.
Thanks for writing this up, this is just the kind of detail I need to see to really
understand the future vision of Teiid and see the implications.
~jd
----- "Ramesh Reddy" <rareddy(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Following through the 6.3
features(http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/teiid-dev/2009-September/000218...,
I have taken time to write a simple proof of concept prototype of JCA
based Teiid use case using JBoss Embedded container. The results have
been very positive.
I have put together my brain dump on this subject as
requirements/design
document. Please take time to read, as this proposes a shift in Teiid
architecture that affects all areas of Teiid.
http://www.jboss.org/community/wiki/TeiidInJCAContainer
If you would like keep up with progress of this project watch
https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/TEIID-833
Please let me know if you have any suggestions and comments to make
this
even better.
Thank you.
Ramesh..
_______________________________________________
teiid-designer-dev mailing list
teiid-designer-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/teiid-designer-dev
5:49 p.m.
New subject: [teiid-designer-dev] Teiid In JCA Container
On Mon, 2009-10-19 at 10:36 -0400, John Doyle wrote:
Has there been any discussion concerning how these changes effect the
attractiveness embedded of Teiid? I'm concerned that it will be less attractive in
OEM opportunities, and not necessarily in any specific technical sense, but that it's
more 'heavyweight' because it requires a container.
Yes. We will not loose
"embedded" configuration. Teiid can use "JBossEmbedded" for this. If
the "JBossEmbedded" proves to be heavy weight then we need to come up a
"profile" like "web profile" in JBoss AS which does not contain
unnecessary services like ejb, jms email etc. This can be done later with out any changes
to code.
I know you mentioned JBJCA for future embedded deployments, can that
replace all the services of the container or our current implementations, or would there
be some loss of functionality?
Do not know yet, as they they do not have too many details on their
site. In those cases, we would either need integrate them from JBoss AS
or stick to JBoss Embedded. This project sounds good, they have ways go
in supporting features.
I need to read up on JCA, but there are some unique connection
management concerns with the SalesForce connector (close one and they all close) that
might have to be resolved.
With the Connector API as before, you do have opportunity to wrap any
connections that you want handle yourself.
Thanks for writing this up, this is just the kind of detail I need to
see to really understand the future vision of Teiid and see the implications.
Thanks. Please do as this is a very important step and we want to go in
the right direction.
Ramesh..
4:30 p.m.
New subject: [teiid-designer-dev] Teiid In JCA Container
I would think the Hibernate usecase would be a good candidate for a
light weight version of Teiid.
On Oct 19, 2009, at 10:49 AM, Ramesh Reddy wrote:
On Mon, 2009-10-19 at 10:36 -0400, John Doyle wrote:
> Has there been any discussion concerning how these changes effect
> the attractiveness embedded of Teiid? I'm concerned that it will
> be less attractive in OEM opportunities, and not necessarily in any
> specific technical sense, but that it's more 'heavyweight' because
> it requires a container.
Yes. We will not loose "embedded" configuration. Teiid can use
"JBossEmbedded" for this. If the "JBossEmbedded" proves to be heavy
weight then we need to come up a "profile" like "web profile" in
JBoss AS which does not contain unnecessary services like ejb, jms
email etc. This can be done later with out any changes to code.
> I know you mentioned JBJCA for future embedded deployments, can
> that replace all the services of the container or our current
> implementations, or would there be some loss of functionality?
>
Do not know yet, as they they do not have too many details on their
site. In those cases, we would either need integrate them from JBoss
AS
or stick to JBoss Embedded. This project sounds good, they have ways
go
in supporting features.
> I need to read up on JCA, but there are some unique connection
> management concerns with the SalesForce connector (close one and
> they all close) that might have to be resolved.
>
With the Connector API as before, you do have opportunity to wrap any
connections that you want handle yourself.
> Thanks for writing this up, this is just the kind of detail I need
> to see to really understand the future vision of Teiid and see the
> implications.
Thanks. Please do as this is a very important step and we want to go
in
the right direction.
Ramesh..
_______________________________________________
teiid-dev mailing list
teiid-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/teiid-dev
Van Halbert
Principal Software Eng.
Red Hat, Inc.
------
vhalbert(a)redhat.com
11:30 p.m.
New subject: [teiid-designer-dev] Teiid In JCA Container
On Tue, 2009-10-20 at 09:30 -0500, Van Halbert wrote:
I would think the Hibernate usecase would be a good candidate for a
light weight version of Teiid.
Yes, that is good use case. I see creating Teiid
profile like "web"
profile in JBoss AS is the way to go. This way we do not need to keep
looking for other solutions, nor filling the gaps in terms of missing
functionality.
5302
days inactive
5303
days old
3 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
John Doyle -
Ramesh Reddy -
Van Halbert