I know Glassfish uses a component called Grizzly but I am unsure of to exactly what role Grizzly performs. I have read that it is a 'front-end' for Glassfish. Is this correct? What exactly does Grizzly do, say when a HTTP request comes in or a response is being send back, does it pass through Grizzly first? And if so, for what reason?
Grizzly does all of the heavy NIO lifting on behalf of one or more of the different containers within GlassFish. It's much like the connector functionality of Tomcat. The Connectors do the network operations on behalf of the core web container.
In the case of HTTP, Grizzly is responsible for parsing and serializing HTTP request/responses. It also provides the infrastructure to allow Servlet Async support to function. In the case of EE7, Grizzly also provides the functionality necessary to support non-blocking I/O within Servlets.
Right from the project home page:
The Grizzly NIO and Web framework has been designed to help developers
to take advantage of the Java™ NIO API. Grizzly's goal is to help
developers to build scalable and robust servers using NIO and we are
also offering extended framework components: Web Framework (HTTP/S),
Bayeux Protocol, Servlet, HttpService OSGi and Comet.
A Users Guide is available along with code examples which demonstrate its various usages.
Please see the Grizzly project on Java.net for more details, and how to participate.
Related
As I understand - there is an opportunity to consume fewer of RAM and CPU.
As I know Servlet 3.1 already has been using NIO too. Are there any advantages in speed and/or loading?
This is a rather broad topic - but let's clear things up first.
Spring MVC is a web framework based on the Servlet API; such apps can be deployed on Servlet containers (like Jetty, Tomcat, Undertow).
Spring WebFlux is a reactive web framework based on a reactive HTTP layer; such apps can be deployed on Netty or Undertow (with native adapters) or Jetty/Tomcat/any Servlet 3.1 container (thanks to a Servlet 3.1 adapter).
Spring Boot applications can use Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux
Spring Framework 5.0 provides an FAQ about that with several useful resources. In short, this approach can be beneficial for efficiency and scalability for workloads dealing with lots of latency and concurrency.
Indeed, Servlet 3.1 async I/O does address those issues as well, but using that API requires to depart from using the other bits of the Servlet API which are blocking. This is why Spring WebFlux doesn't expose the Servlet API in its programming model but leverages a Servlet adapter.
I am working with CoAP protocol on IoT but also I need a web service. I implemented the web service on Apache with HTTP protocol and a Proxy that converts CoAP-HTTP request and responses. But I don't want to use the Proxy to convert CoAP-HTTP. I want to implement directly CoAP web service. Do you have any idea about that. On Apache or different things. Just any idea?
As you wrote On Apache or different things, I will here talk about the second option :). To implement the CoAP server itself, I would recommend either
NodeJS with the CoAP package
Java implementation Californium, from Eclipse.org
More complete list available at http://coap.technology/impls.html#server-side, see Server-side
And then handle the communication with your Apache HTTP server via WebSockets and REST APIs.
coap.me is also great to run tests during development.
I am experimenting with Mule API management these days. What I come to know is we can deploy our API to one of these:
A Mule Runtime
An API Gateway
In the documentation, it is said that we should go with option 1 when we want to separate out the implementation of your API from the orchestration. What does it mean?
Can any one please explain in detail?
Policy management from API Platform and analytics generation can be achieved only by using a correctly configured API Gateway, which is a superset of Mule EE (current version is API Gateway 2.1.0 which contains Mule EE 3.7.2).
Depending on your architecture you may have different solutions.
For example:
Proxy running on API Gateway, implementation API running somewhere
else (eg. Mule EE/CE, Tomcat, cobol server, etc)
Proxy and implementation API running on the same API Gateway
Implementation API
managed directly from API Platform without using the autogenerated
proxies.
HTH :-)
Not exactly sure what they mean there, because on this page: https://developer.mulesoft.com/docs/display/current/API+Gateway they also mention this:
Note that the API Gateway, because it acts as an orchestration layer
for services and APIs implemented elsewhere, is technology-agnostic.
You can proxy non-Mule services or APIs of any kind, as long as they
expose HTTP/HTTPS, VM, Jetty, or APIkit Router endpoints. You can also
proxy APIs that you design and build with API Designer and APIkit to
the API Gateway to separate the orchestration from the implementation
of those APIs.
So both methods technically allow you to separate API from orchestration, as your API gateway application could simply proxy another Mule application elsewhere that performs the orchestration. But my understanding of the two options are:
The API gateway is a limited offering that allows you to use a subset of Mule's connectors, transports and modules such as ApiKit and HTTP, it allows you to expose and API then use http to connect to whatever backend systems you want as a proxy and perform the orchestration in the API layer.
By using the Mule runtime operation, it gives you much more flexibility and allows you to compose as many applications as you want using the full range of connectors etc. and separate out the different aspects of your applications into as many layers as you want as separately deployable entities that you can deploy to on-premise standalone instances or Cloudhub etc.
#Ryan answer is more or less on the mark, however if you do choose the Mule ESB offering you will loose out on the API Management and governance functionality that API gateway provides OOTB.
These include
Lets you enforce runtime policies and collect data for analytics
Applies policies to APIs or endpoints around security, throttling,
rate limiting, and more
Extends PingFederate to serve as identity management and OAuth
provider for your APIs
Lets you require or restrict certain behaviors in a few simple steps
Lets you add or remove policies at runtime with no API downtime
Manages access to your API by issuing contract keys
Monitors the API to confirm it is meeting all contract terms
Ensures compliance with service level agreements (SLAs)
In my opinion go with API Gateway/Manager if your API will be consumed my third party developers with whom you might not have too many interactions (think public API's) else Mule ESB should be good.
You should be able to migrate from Mule ESB to API Manager (and vice versa) also easily if you need to, so I do not think you will get locked into your decision
PS: Content copied from here
My friend asked to explain me what's the difference between Spring, axis2 and Jersey. Here I listed down a few differences that I'm aware of. Please comment/respond if you know more differences
Spring webservices:
A java web application with a servlet configured in
web.xml(org.springframework.ws.transport.http.MessageDispatcherServlet).
You can use spring annotated POJOs for creating web services
Supports both RESTful and SOAP based web services.
Since it’s a web application you can use http authentication mechanisms
for enabling security
Axis2:
The webservice application is a .aar file that will be deployed in
axis2.war
Use AXIOM for using non-primitive type arguments to web service calls
You can use JSR181 annotations to create webservices
You can use spring-dependency injection using axis2 extensions.
Supports both RESTful and SOAP based web services.
I guess you have to use ws-security implementation for
providing security
to your web services>
They claim hot deployment of webservices works but I haven’t seen
it working.
Jersey:
A regular web application with a servlet configured in web.xml.
Write custom message readers/writers for using
non-primitive type arguments to web
service calls
Since it’s a web application you can use http authentication mechanisms
for enabling security
Supports only RESTful implementation of web services
I have seen hot deployment working may be because it’s a web application
and the container can do hot
deployment
I'm not familiar with Jersey and Axis, but I can tell you something about Spring-WS.
You cannot use Spring-WS for restful webservices. Spring-WS is intended to be used for contract first webservices. You can however use the features of Spring 3.x and Spring-MVC for REST services.
As for authorization, you can easily wire in any sort of security (with Spring-Security for instance).
I'm a big fan of the 'automatic' (de) marshalling features of Spring-WS. Just annotate your methods with the correct types and it'll know what to do.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I just heard about Apache Wink, and I was wondering what differences it had compared to Jersey or JBoss RESTEasy. What can be done in one that the other two can't?
We've been using Jersey for some of our internal projects mostly for it's simplicity, but I can't really figure out what makes these other two any better that I would consider switching. Does anyone have any use-cases for which niche each of these fills?
JAX-RS Implementations
Jersey
Reference Implementation
Usually the most cutting edge
Supports true asynchronous (ie web sockets etc...) connections through either Atmosphere or 2.0 version.
Has support for Spring and standard injection containers (ie #Inject).
Glassfish bundles it.
Its much more modular than the other JAX-RS projects.
It has a kick ass URI Builder
Does not necessarily require servlet container.
Grizzly support
Netty support (very early).
Swagger support
Sort of missing OAuth 2.0 . You'll have to use other libraries.
Some MVC support through Viewables
Hosted on java.net (a minus as the site is terribly slow at times).
Licensing is based on CCDL 1.1 and GPL-v2. Please make sure you check Jersey licensing before you use it for commercial use
https://jersey.github.io/license.html
RestEasy
Much of the above but most notable supports view technologies (see HTMLEasy)
It does have asynchronous connection support
Cache support
EJB support (if your into that crap)
JBoss bundles it (I think)
Netty support
Arguably the best Spring integration (MVC handler).
Early Swagger support
More security support including early OAuth 2.0 support
Apache Wink (never used it)
I have no idea why this project exists.
Supposedly its high performance focused.
It has a client built on top of HttpUrlConnection (which is a minus... it should be pluggable like Spring RestTemplate).
Basically Wink was developed in house at some enterprise companies and then given to Apache.
Requires a servlet container.
Restlet
Very powerful but very complicated
Provides some low-level REST support
Does not require a servlet container
Apache CXF
Some interesting WADL support.
Reuse and or combine JAX-RS w/ JAX-WS
Security support
Integration w/ Spring albeit kind of nasty
Supposed Autogeneration of client stubs
Other RPC-like systems
Message Queues
RabbitMQ
ActiveMQ
Asynchronous RPC
Finagle -- from Twitter.
msgpack-rpc
My humble opinion
I know the OP asked for REST but if this is for internal communication seriously consider using either a message queue or some other asynchronous RPC (Finagle) instead of traditional REST if your requirements match those systems.
If it must be classic HTTP REST (external) I would choose between either RestEasy or Jersey as a bulk of the mind share is put into those two projects.
Also see: Rest clients for Java?
When choosing the implementation to use have this in mind: if you try to deploy a Jersey web service to JBOSS 7.1, it will not work. This error will occur:
Only one JAX-RS Application Class allowed
This is because REST Easy comes bundled with JBOSS as the default JAX-RS implementation. So, JBOSS will decide that that's the implementation you want to use and will not load another JAX-RS implementation (like Jersey). In order to fix this, you need to add the following lines to your web.xml file:
<context-param>
<param-name>resteasy.scan</param-name>
<param-value>false</param-value>
</context-param>
<context-param>
<param-name>resteasy.scan.providers</param-name>
<param-value>false</param-value>
</context-param>
<context-param>
<param-name>resteasy.scan.resources</param-name>
<param-value>false</param-value>
</context-param>
Link: https://community.jboss.org/message/744530
One of my favourite Jersey extensions is Viewables. Viewables allow you to bind your data easily to a JSP page to implement a true Model-View-Controller (MVC) architecture:
http://blogs.oracle.com/sandoz/entry/mvcj
If you're going to use JBoss 7.x you must use RestEasy, 'cause it's integrated in JBoss. To use Jersey with JBoss 7.x, you have to disable RestEasy and it is complicated!