UWECProgrammer/ConsolidatedMentionResolutionBenchmark

sentence stringlengths 1 1.38k	label stringclasses 3 values
I'm afraid not Matt Ball :/.	o
Maybe too late, but it may help somebody that finds this thread looking for the problem described above about 'Caused by: java.lang.NoSuchMethodException: org.hibernate.validator.ClassValidator....': I'm using Jboss 4.2, Hibernate Core 3.6.5, Hibernate Validator 4.1.0, using maven, and I have the same problem.	o
Finally I've solved it adding also this dependency: CODESNIPPET_JAVA1 .	o
Upvoting you just in case it does help someone else, too late for me I'm afraid :).	p
Thanks mate.	o
Did help.	o
I didn't test this personally, but the URL_http://community.jboss.org/message/565026 [following-thread] mentions two approaches that you could try (yeah, I know, it's about JBoss 5 but it looks like the problem is identical).	o
Option 1 Disable CODETERM1 (your second jboss-web.xml), bundle your Hibernate JARs into your app and add the following properties to your CODETERM2 (to "avoid" the issue you're facing): CODESNIPPET_JAVA1 .	o
One user reported this didn't work for him.	o
Option 2 Disable CODETERM3 (your second jboss-web.xml), bundle your Hibernate JARs into your app and override the hibernate-validator JARs CODETERM4	o
I'm not able to explain why the hibernate-validator from CODETERM5 still gets picked.	o
Cheers mate, I will try that when I can stop hiding from the big scary dead line looming over me :).	n
@willcodejavaforfood: Sounds like a good decision.	p
Thanks a lot, Option 1 worked for me!	o
(Jboss 4.2 with Hibernate 3.2.6.ga on the main app, second app is Play!Framework 1.2.5 bundled with Hibernate 3.6).	o
Many thanks, Option 1 (which seems more elegant) worked for me with Hibernate 3.6.0.Final and JBoss 4.2.1.GA.	p
It was a BIG pain to resolve that strange conflict !	n
!.	o
Active MQ vs JBoss Messaging.	o
I am going to choose a JMS message broker for a project.	o
It is critical that the JMS server is stable and can handle a high load of messages.	n
I have narrowed down the list to include Active MQ and JBoss Messaging.	o
I was wondering if any of you have any experience with any of these or even better have tried both of them in the same environment.	o
Any link to a research paper or similar would be nice.	p
I'd love to hear about this as well.	p
Should this be community wiki?	o
URL_http://activemq.apache.org/how-does-activemq-compare-to-jbossmq.html [ URL_http://activemq.apache.org/how-does-activemq-compare-to-jbossmq.html ] .	o
I am not interested in JBoss MQ but JBoss Messaging.	o
And an independent report would be nice.....	p
Note for those who don't know: JBoss Messaging is a rewrite of JBoss MQ that advertises much improved performance.	o
It's not a rewrite, really, it shares nothing in common with JBossMQ at all, other than being a JMS implementation with "JBoss" in the title.	o
JBoss Messaging is now in bug fix mode only, since JBoss / Red Hat has a new Java messaging project called HornetQ.	n
The web site is here URL_http://hornetq.org [ URL_http://hornetq.org ] HornetQ boasts extreme performance, a full feature set and ease of use.	n
You'll find it's performance compared to ActiveMQ is _extremely_ good.	p
BTW - I am the project lead for JBoss Messaging and HornetQ.	o
HornetQ 2.0.0.GA is out in the next week.	o
JBoss recently redid their entire implementation of Messaging, ala JBoss MQ has been replaced with JBoss Messaging, and now again as "HornetQ".	o
You'll just want to keep that in mind as that above comparison is _very_ dated (not to mention probably biased).	o
Feature-by-feature comparisons are all very well, but my experience of ActiveMQ (through various versions over the years) is that it is shockingly buggy, and noone seems inclined to fix those bugs.	n
It's deeply frustrating.	n
Also, the documentation is messy and not properly updated with new versions.	o
JBossMessaging is relatively feature-light, compared to ActiveMQ, but it's rock-solid, well-documented and reliable.	o
It's also part of JBossAS 5, and RedHat are doing a good job of supporting it.	p
So far, I had a great experience with the community wiki and documentation of Jboss, and it pretty much covers everything.	p
Though, I found quite obvious configuration settings left out in their latest documentations, but I guess this must have been improved since then.	o
For ActiveMQ, I found very little documentation comparing to Jboss.	n
I have done certain research using MOM with Jboss and GlassFish, but one of the most important impact was the permanent storage if you are going to use any.	o
I think this itself is very important, especially their compatibility, support, documentations.	o
Take a look at this.	o
Apparently there are certain concern when it comes to persistent storage in ActiveMQ.	n
URL_http://www.jboss.org/file-access/default/members/jbossmessaging/freezone/d ocs/userguide-2.0.0.alpha1/html/performance.html#performance.results [ URL_http://www.jboss.org/file-access/default/members/jbossmessaging/freezone/docs /userguide-2.0.0.alpha1/html/performance.html#performance.results] .	o
JBoss Messaging replaces JBoss MQ.	o
Here are Messaging performance data: URL_http://www.jboss.org/community/docs/DOC-10640 [ URL_http://www.jboss.org/community/docs/DOC-10640 ] JBoss MQ is not scalable at all: URL_http://www.jboss.org/community/docs/DOC-12452 [ URL_http://www.jboss.org/community/docs/DOC-12452 ] .	n
JBossMQ may not scale as well as JBM, but to say "not scalable at all" is just plain wrong.	n
We use it for fairly high volumes, and it handles this without a complaint or a problem.	o
Sorry, I should have said hardly scalable.For example, MQ creates 3 threads per subscriber.	n
If there is active messaging ongoing, it adds up to 10 other threads for such subscriber.	o
On our MQ system we have an average of 3.5 threads per subscriber.Having 300 users served that makes 1000 threads just for MQ.	o
If a message is put for all subscribes, 300 of those threads queue for CPU.	o
HornetQ looks good.	p
URL_http://www.spec.org/jms2007/results/jms2007.html [ URL_http://www.spec.org/jms2007/results/jms2007.html ] .	o
Real world comparisons of Glassfish and JBoss 5?	o
Does anyone have experiences with both in the real world?	o
How do they compare in terms of performance (memory usage, speed, etc)?	o
Stability?	o
Does JBoss Seam work well on Glassfish?	o
please, rephrase the question as comparing between EITHER: Glassfish 2 vs JBoss 5, ....or.... Glassfish 3 vs JBoss 6.	o
A number of things from my own experience: 1.	o
GlassFish has much better administration console(JBoss has three consoles, each of them far from being ideal).	p
2.	o
Hot deployment is more reliable on GlassFish 3.	o
JMS works better on GlassFish - this applies to GF vs. JBoss 4.X.As far as I see the JMS implementation was drastically modified inJBoss 5.X, so maybe this claim is no longer true 4.	n
WebServices are working better on GlassFish,I had a number of issues with more advanced configuration on JBoss 5.	p
GlassFish has more super-high-end entrprise add-ons, like HA-Database, that storesuser session on a cluster in Database, not in memory, so the full failover ispossible, whatever disaster would happen 6.	n
JBoss is more much popular, there are a lot of administrators, developers, who know it,so it is easier to find someone, who can develop on JBoss, there are also moreresources in the net.	p
Sometimes this is more important, then technical superiority ofone solution over another.	n
7.	o
GlassFish is friendlier for developers.	p
Redeployment of the web application on GF 3lasts more or less one second - in oreder to achieve this kind of speedof redeployment for JBoss I need JRebel.	o
In addition, if someone is using NetBeans,there is a number of smart wizards, that are very helpful.	p
8.	o
The future of GlassFish is not certain because of the acquisition of SUN by Oracle.Right now Oracle claims it will support it, but who knows how this support willlook like and how long will it last.	o
Even though GlassFish is open source, hardly anyone is ready to develop application server for his/her own needs... From my point of view GF is easier to administer, is a better solution from purely technological point of view, but it is far less popular and has uncertain future.	p
I am not connected in any way with RedHat/JBoss or SUN/GlassFish, my company (erudis.pl) is supporting and developing for both servers.	o
An excellent summary, can't fault that comparison.	o
(disclaimer: I work at Sun and I am in the GF team) I agree that Seam works fine on GlassFish; see URL_https://blogs.oracle.com/theaquarium/tags/seam [ URL_https://blogs.oracle.com/theaquarium/tags/seam ] GFv3 is quite different than JBoss 5; in particular: GFv3 is based on OSGi while JBoss 5's kernel is based on JMX.	o
GFv3 supports JavaEE 6; JBoss 5 supports Java EE 5.	o
GFv3 is designed to be very modular; services start on demand, there is an update center repository, etc.	o
GFv3 is significantly smaller than JBoss 5 and will start much faster.	p
JBoss 5.1 GA is listed as 130MB; GFv3Preview is 50MB.	o
GFv3 starts in a couple of seconds; JBoss in tens (you should try the startup for your own platform).	o
There are other differences, some inherited from GlassFish v2 like the graphical admin console, or the admin CLI.	o
A more direct comparison for JBoss 5 would be the GlassFish v2 releases, which are based on Java EE 5.	o
The latest release in that family is GFv2.1, with a GFv2.1.1 release scheduled in October (see URL_https://blogs.oracle.com/theaquarium/entry/schedule_for_glassfish_v2_1 [ URL_https://blogs.oracle.com/theaquarium/entry/schedule_for_glassfish_v2_1 ] ).	o
Sun also provides patch releases of GlassFish (akin to RedHat's support for JBoss); see URL_https://blogs.oracle.com/glassfishforbusiness [ URL_https://blogs.oracle.com/glassfishforbusiness ] and sun.com/glassfish.	o
Your comparisons are disingenuous.	n
(1) The JBoss5 kernel is not JMX based (JBoss 4 was, not 5).	o
(2) JBoss is also modular, you pick which modules you want.	o
The configurations it ships with are just starting points.	o
(3) Startup time depends which config you pick, it varies from around 3 seconds for a minimal config, to a minute or ttwo for the bells-and-whistles config.	o

I'm afraid not Matt Ball :/.

o

Maybe too late, but it may help somebody that finds this thread looking for the problem described above about 'Caused by: java.lang.NoSuchMethodException: org.hibernate.validator.ClassValidator....': I'm using Jboss 4.2, Hibernate Core 3.6.5, Hibernate Validator 4.1.0, using maven, and I have the same problem.

o

Finally I've solved it adding also this dependency: CODESNIPPET_JAVA1 .

o

Upvoting you just in case it does help someone else, too late for me I'm afraid :).

p

Thanks mate.

o

Did help.

o

I didn't test this personally, but the URL_http://community.jboss.org/message/565026 [following-thread] mentions two approaches that you could try (yeah, I know, it's about JBoss 5 but it looks like the problem is identical).

o

Option 1 Disable CODETERM1 (your second jboss-web.xml), bundle your Hibernate JARs into your app and add the following properties to your CODETERM2 (to "avoid" the issue you're facing): CODESNIPPET_JAVA1 .

o

One user reported this didn't work for him.

o

Option 2 Disable CODETERM3 (your second jboss-web.xml), bundle your Hibernate JARs into your app and override the hibernate-validator JARs CODETERM4

o

I'm not able to explain why the hibernate-validator from CODETERM5 still gets picked.

o

Cheers mate, I will try that when I can stop hiding from the big scary dead line looming over me :).

n

@willcodejavaforfood: Sounds like a good decision.

p

Thanks a lot, Option 1 worked for me!

o

(Jboss 4.2 with Hibernate 3.2.6.ga on the main app, second app is Play!Framework 1.2.5 bundled with Hibernate 3.6).

o

Many thanks, Option 1 (which seems more elegant) worked for me with Hibernate 3.6.0.Final and JBoss 4.2.1.GA.

p

It was a BIG pain to resolve that strange conflict !

n

!.

o

Active MQ vs JBoss Messaging.

o

I am going to choose a JMS message broker for a project.

o

It is critical that the JMS server is stable and can handle a high load of messages.

n

I have narrowed down the list to include Active MQ and JBoss Messaging.

o

I was wondering if any of you have any experience with any of these or even better have tried both of them in the same environment.

o

Any link to a research paper or similar would be nice.

p

I'd love to hear about this as well.

p

Should this be community wiki?

o

URL_http://activemq.apache.org/how-does-activemq-compare-to-jbossmq.html [ URL_http://activemq.apache.org/how-does-activemq-compare-to-jbossmq.html ] .

o

I am not interested in JBoss MQ but JBoss Messaging.

o

And an independent report would be nice.....

p

Note for those who don't know: JBoss Messaging is a rewrite of JBoss MQ that advertises much improved performance.

o

It's not a rewrite, really, it shares nothing in common with JBossMQ at all, other than being a JMS implementation with "JBoss" in the title.

o

JBoss Messaging is now in bug fix mode only, since JBoss / Red Hat has a new Java messaging project called HornetQ.

n

The web site is here URL_http://hornetq.org [ URL_http://hornetq.org ] HornetQ boasts extreme performance, a full feature set and ease of use.

n

You'll find it's performance compared to ActiveMQ is _extremely_ good.

p

BTW - I am the project lead for JBoss Messaging and HornetQ.

o

HornetQ 2.0.0.GA is out in the next week.

o

JBoss recently redid their entire implementation of Messaging, ala JBoss MQ has been replaced with JBoss Messaging, and now again as "HornetQ".

o

You'll just want to keep that in mind as that above comparison is _very_ dated (not to mention probably biased).

o

Feature-by-feature comparisons are all very well, but my experience of ActiveMQ (through various versions over the years) is that it is shockingly buggy, and noone seems inclined to fix those bugs.

n

It's deeply frustrating.

n

Also, the documentation is messy and not properly updated with new versions.

o

JBossMessaging is relatively feature-light, compared to ActiveMQ, but it's rock-solid, well-documented and reliable.

o

It's also part of JBossAS 5, and RedHat are doing a good job of supporting it.

p

So far, I had a great experience with the community wiki and documentation of Jboss, and it pretty much covers everything.

p

Though, I found quite obvious configuration settings left out in their latest documentations, but I guess this must have been improved since then.

o

For ActiveMQ, I found very little documentation comparing to Jboss.

n

I have done certain research using MOM with Jboss and GlassFish, but one of the most important impact was the permanent storage if you are going to use any.

o

I think this itself is very important, especially their compatibility, support, documentations.

o

Take a look at this.

o

Apparently there are certain concern when it comes to persistent storage in ActiveMQ.

n

URL_http://www.jboss.org/file-access/default/members/jbossmessaging/freezone/d ocs/userguide-2.0.0.alpha1/html/performance.html#performance.results [ URL_http://www.jboss.org/file-access/default/members/jbossmessaging/freezone/docs /userguide-2.0.0.alpha1/html/performance.html#performance.results] .

o

JBoss Messaging replaces JBoss MQ.

o

Here are Messaging performance data: URL_http://www.jboss.org/community/docs/DOC-10640 [ URL_http://www.jboss.org/community/docs/DOC-10640 ] JBoss MQ is not scalable at all: URL_http://www.jboss.org/community/docs/DOC-12452 [ URL_http://www.jboss.org/community/docs/DOC-12452 ] .

n

JBossMQ may not scale as well as JBM, but to say "not scalable at all" is just plain wrong.

n

We use it for fairly high volumes, and it handles this without a complaint or a problem.

o

Sorry, I should have said hardly scalable.For example, MQ creates 3 threads per subscriber.

n

If there is active messaging ongoing, it adds up to 10 other threads for such subscriber.

o

On our MQ system we have an average of 3.5 threads per subscriber.Having 300 users served that makes 1000 threads just for MQ.

o

If a message is put for all subscribes, 300 of those threads queue for CPU.

o

HornetQ looks good.

p

URL_http://www.spec.org/jms2007/results/jms2007.html [ URL_http://www.spec.org/jms2007/results/jms2007.html ] .

o

Real world comparisons of Glassfish and JBoss 5?

o

Does anyone have experiences with both in the real world?

o

How do they compare in terms of performance (memory usage, speed, etc)?

o

Stability?

o

Does JBoss Seam work well on Glassfish?

o

please, rephrase the question as comparing between EITHER: Glassfish 2 vs JBoss 5, ....or.... Glassfish 3 vs JBoss 6.

o

A number of things from my own experience: 1.

o

GlassFish has much better administration console(JBoss has three consoles, each of them far from being ideal).

p

2.

o

Hot deployment is more reliable on GlassFish 3.

o

JMS works better on GlassFish - this applies to GF vs. JBoss 4.X.As far as I see the JMS implementation was drastically modified inJBoss 5.X, so maybe this claim is no longer true 4.

n

WebServices are working better on GlassFish,I had a number of issues with more advanced configuration on JBoss 5.

p

GlassFish has more super-high-end entrprise add-ons, like HA-Database, that storesuser session on a cluster in Database, not in memory, so the full failover ispossible, whatever disaster would happen 6.

n

JBoss is more much popular, there are a lot of administrators, developers, who know it,so it is easier to find someone, who can develop on JBoss, there are also moreresources in the net.

p

Sometimes this is more important, then technical superiority ofone solution over another.

n

7.

o

GlassFish is friendlier for developers.

p

Redeployment of the web application on GF 3lasts more or less one second - in oreder to achieve this kind of speedof redeployment for JBoss I need JRebel.

o

In addition, if someone is using NetBeans,there is a number of smart wizards, that are very helpful.

p

8.

o

The future of GlassFish is not certain because of the acquisition of SUN by Oracle.Right now Oracle claims it will support it, but who knows how this support willlook like and how long will it last.

o

Even though GlassFish is open source, hardly anyone is ready to develop application server for his/her own needs... From my point of view GF is easier to administer, is a better solution from purely technological point of view, but it is far less popular and has uncertain future.

p

I am not connected in any way with RedHat/JBoss or SUN/GlassFish, my company (erudis.pl) is supporting and developing for both servers.

o

An excellent summary, can't fault that comparison.

o

(disclaimer: I work at Sun and I am in the GF team) I agree that Seam works fine on GlassFish; see URL_https://blogs.oracle.com/theaquarium/tags/seam [ URL_https://blogs.oracle.com/theaquarium/tags/seam ] GFv3 is quite different than JBoss 5; in particular: GFv3 is based on OSGi while JBoss 5's kernel is based on JMX.

o

GFv3 supports JavaEE 6; JBoss 5 supports Java EE 5.

o

GFv3 is designed to be very modular; services start on demand, there is an update center repository, etc.

o

GFv3 is significantly smaller than JBoss 5 and will start much faster.

p

JBoss 5.1 GA is listed as 130MB; GFv3Preview is 50MB.

o

GFv3 starts in a couple of seconds; JBoss in tens (you should try the startup for your own platform).

o

There are other differences, some inherited from GlassFish v2 like the graphical admin console, or the admin CLI.

o

A more direct comparison for JBoss 5 would be the GlassFish v2 releases, which are based on Java EE 5.

o

The latest release in that family is GFv2.1, with a GFv2.1.1 release scheduled in October (see URL_https://blogs.oracle.com/theaquarium/entry/schedule_for_glassfish_v2_1 [ URL_https://blogs.oracle.com/theaquarium/entry/schedule_for_glassfish_v2_1 ] ).

o

Sun also provides patch releases of GlassFish (akin to RedHat's support for JBoss); see URL_https://blogs.oracle.com/glassfishforbusiness [ URL_https://blogs.oracle.com/glassfishforbusiness ] and sun.com/glassfish.

o

Your comparisons are disingenuous.

n

(1) The JBoss5 kernel is not JMX based (JBoss 4 was, not 5).

o

(2) JBoss is also modular, you pick which modules you want.

o

The configurations it ships with are just starting points.

o

(3) Startup time depends which config you pick, it varies from around 3 seconds for a minimal config, to a minute or ttwo for the bells-and-whistles config.

o