Re: JMS vs Sockets -- bandwidth, size, speed, etc.

From:

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.java.programmer

Date:

Thu, 27 Dec 2012 13:18:44 -0500

Message-ID:

<50dc910b$0$286$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>

On 12/27/2012 8:26 AM, Sven K?hler wrote:

Am 27.12.2012 01:00, schrieb Arne Vajh?j:

So the question is whether to use socket API or JMS API.
A third option would be RMI.

If performance is a concern, better not use RMI. One call to a method
(e.g. in order to deliver some data to the peer) will always take at
least one roundtrip, as the caller side has to wait until the method
(even if it is void) returns.

If the requirements are for true async, then RMI is not a good fit
as it is always sync request-response.

A fourth option is to use object serialization without RMI, i.e.
ObjectOutputStream and ObjectInputStream. It is worth it, if your
protocol allows you to send multiple objects (or messages for that
matter) without having to wait for a reply.

I am not sure that I would count that as a distinct option.

The socket option will need something on top of it.

PrintWriter/BufferedReader
ObjectInputStream/ObjectOutputStream
DataInputStream/DataOutputStream
etc.

Arne