It seems that Fuse ESB has been bought out by Red Hat and will now be provided as JBoss Fuse.
Is it correct to presume they are essentially the same technology, plus or minus a few improvements?
I see that both are open source and built on the same technology stack, so I am hopeful that this is just a name change without any significant impact to existing projects.
Yes its a name change as part of the acquisition. JBoss Fuse is the new name the product is using now, from its new owner Red Hat.
There will be no new releases of the old product (Fuse ESB) from FuseSource.
Related
I'm searching for a main difference between OpenShift Origin and OpenShift Enterprise. I know that the first is open source and the latter is the commercial version. Have OpenShift Enterprise got other features compared to the open source version?
Thanks in advance.
Update 3/21/2018: If you find this old answer of mine in the future, Enterprise is called "OpenShift Container Platform" now.
The community version goes faster, but with change comes some risk. If you would like to be an early adopter Origin could be your choice. Note: support is best effort by the community, but I have found very helpful people on IRC and on the project's github page.
Link: https://github.com/openshift/origin
The enterprise version has the advantage of professional support for your money. While you won't get features as early, in exchange there is focus on stability and streamlining. This may be important for enterprises. Some solutions / examples may not work exactly the same way. For example application templates, utilities come as part of packages for RHEL users. It also comes with some entitlements for things like RHEL and CloudForms integration.
I tried installing a one master, one node small cluster with both, and found them just as good.
In short, stability or early adoption. Oh, and bugfixes.
Personally I prefer to go with Origin, as you can monitor the state of the project yourself and you are not forced to jump on every coming train. Update when suitable.
OpenShift Origin is the open source community version of OpenShift Enterprise. In order to understand what this means, you need to understand what open source software is - computer software developed via a competitive collaborative model from many individual sources. Origin updates as often as open source developers contribute via git, a version control system, sometimes as often as several times per week.
OpenShift Enterprise 3integrates with Red Hat Enterprise Linux and is tested via Red Hat's QA process in order to offer a stable, supportable product for customers who want to have their own private or onsite cloud. Enterprise might update around every six months, maintaining stabilization across minor updates. Providing timely professional support for each query they have from installation/POC to the production.
I am asked to upgrade IBM WebSphere application server 8.0 to 8.5.5 on linux environment. Could you please give me a step by step guide for this migration?
thanks,
Kumar
The simplest method (assuming your WebSphere instances have enough spare CPU/disk/etc) is to build a second WebSphere cell at the new level and migrate applications across one at a time. Access to the application servers should be controlled by either a web server (using the WAS plugin) or an IP sprayer product and which version of app server used should be controlled in that layer. Updating in place has many pitfalls and can be difficult to recover from if something goes wrong which can lead to extended down time for your applications.
The Coherence functionality seems to based on clustering concept. Does this mean that, if I want to install WLS on my system for development use, I do not need the Coherence component that comes with WLS ?
Correct, it is not required to use WLS.
This may help to answer the question:
Coherence is now on the same "release train" as WebLogic, starting with version WebLogic version 12.1.2 (which is the second point release of the WebLogic "12c" major release version). So from now on, Coherence and WebLogic versions are in sync, and the two products are tested and certified together.
Coherence is "physically" included as part of some WebLogic installers. Coherence can be purchased as a separate product (three editions: Standard, Enterprise, Grid), or it can be purchased as part of the WebLogic Suite product (which comes with Enterprise Edition, but can be upgraded to Grid Edition).
WebLogic now has a free developer license available, and that free developer license covers Coherence development as well. (Previously, customers had to pay for a developer license, mainly AFAICT because that is how the database was licensed. We are glad to have fixed this!)
WebLogic can be used without Coherence. Coherence can be used without WebLogic. And both products can also be used together, using Coherence*Web for session management, WebLogic Active Cache for simple caching use cases, or Coherence Containers for full-blown, deployable, life-cycle managed, multi-tier data grid applications that are integrated with Java EE applications on WebLogic.
I hope this helps to clarify the possible options that you have.
For the sake of full disclosure, I work at Oracle. The opinions and views expressed in this post are my own, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or views of my employer.
What is the impact on existing code to migrate from WebSphere MQ V6 to V7?
Can we make simply the change?
Like all good questions, the answer here is "it depends."
First of all, don't go to v7.0, go to V7.1 at least, better yet to V7.5.
Using client or bindings mode connections? You can upgrade the QMgr without touching a client-based app in most cases. Any version of WMQ client can talk to any version of WMQ server, however its best not to leave apps on an unsupported version of WMQ client. Of course, the app running on the old client won't get the new function such as automatic reconnect or performance improvements, even though the QMgr is at V7.5.
Using SSL? The SSLPEER element order changed and the commands to manage certificates changed. Good news, cert management is now performed with runmq*km commands living in the {mq install}/bin directory so you don't need to hunt down the GSKit directory and figure out whether to use gsk6*, gsk7* or gsk8* commands.
If you go from 32 to 64 bit, you may need to recompile programs or exits.
Correct settings for PATH, CLASSPATH and LIBPATH change across versions.
There's much more and it's well covered in the Infoceenter. Each Infocenter has a section on migration. Within that section, there's subsections by version and within those there are subsections by platform. Pick the target version of WMQ (that's V7.5, right? Say yes!) and and drill down. Start here:
Migration from V6.0 to V7.5
Migration from V6.0 to V7.1
Migration from V6.0 to V7.0
Do you use Glassfish 2 or v3 in a production environment?
Do you find it robust?
Have you ever been able to find a complete set of documentation?
What do you do when you find that Glassfish ignores J2EE standards, like class and anotation scanning?
Glassfish is Sun's reference standard for a J2EE app server. V3 supports the new 3.1 standard. However, it is only a preview. It is currently scheduled to be released on Dec 10, 2009. Of course, it can always be dangerous to be a very early adopter in a production environment. Currently V3 doesn't support JMS or clustering, for example, but they should be in the final release.
I've used V2 in production for about 3 years and I personally like it. The web admin console makes it very easy to manage (http://localhost:4848, admin, adminadmin), and the performance is good. Here's one example, where someone benchmarked Glassfish: Blog. Of course, you should search for more examples and your YMMV. Here's a Sun document for Glassfish to help Tomcat User.
One last thing that I would add is that Sun ships, and integrates, both Tomcat and Glassfish in their Java IDE Netbeans so you can easily switch between the two app servers to test your particular app.
GlassFish Server V3 or V2 can be used in production environments but the number of users should be less than 1500. Its not very robust and scalable during high load. If used for simple applications GF works perfectly fine, as it is the reference implementation of Java EE standards by Sun which only server to be a guide to other vendors of application servers.
For more complex and high load applications, its better to go to IBM WebSphere Application Server. That's the most robust app server I have seen in my 15 yrs of experience.
Do I use GF in production? no.
Do I find it robust? yes, but I do not tax it very hard.
Have I ever found a complete set of documentation? I think so... the GlassFish v2.1 docs and the GlassFish v3 docs (http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/prod/gf.entsvr.v3?l=en&a=view)
What do I do when GlassFish ignores the J2EE standards? I file an issue here: https://glassfish.dev.java.net/issues/
Do I use in production? Yes. (Now, using 3.0.1)
Is it robust? Yes. But my point of view is from someone that likes to follow the server's developers community and can try some tricks.
What about documentation? The official one is really good, and the developers blogs are a great plus (http://blogs.oracle.com/theaquarium/). What is maybe far from other communities, at the moment, is the collective experience material (like forums), but I think the mail lists are good enough (http://glassfish.java.net/public/mailing-lists.html).