java Glassfish 和 JBoss 5 的真实世界比较？

Real world comparisons of Glassfish and JBoss 5?

提问by jsight

Does anyone have experiences with both in the real world? How do they compare in terms of performance (memory usage, speed, etc)? Stability?

有没有人在现实世界中拥有这两种体验？它们在性能（内存使用、速度等）方面如何比较？稳定？

Does JBoss Seam work well on Glassfish?

JBoss Seam 在 Glassfish 上运行良好吗？

回答by Piotr Kochański

A number of things from my own experience:

以我自己的经验总结几点：

1. GlassFish has much better administration console (JBoss has three consoles, each of them far from being ideal).
2. Hot deployment is more reliable on GlassFish
3. JMS works better on GlassFish - this applies to GF vs. JBoss 4.X. As far as I see the JMS implementation was drastically modified in JBoss 5.X, so maybe this claim is no longer true
4. WebServices are working better on GlassFish, I had a number of issues with more advanced configuration on JBoss
5. GlassFish has more super-high-end entrprise add-ons, like HA-Database, that stores user session on a cluster in Database, not in memory, so the full failover is possible, whatever disaster would happen
6. 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 more resources in the net. Sometimes this is more important, then technical superiority of one solution over another.
7. GlassFish is friendlier for developers. Redeployment of the web application on GF 3 lasts more or less one second - in oreder to achieve this kind of speed of redeployment for JBoss I need JRebel. In addition, if someone is using NetBeans, there is a number of smart wizards, that are very helpful.
8. 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 will look like and how long will it last. Even though GlassFish is open source, hardly anyone is ready to develop application server for his/her own needs...

1. GlassFish 有更好的管理控制台（JBoss 有三个控制台，每个都远非理想）。
2. GlassFish 上的热部署更可靠
3. JMS 在 GlassFish 上运行得更好 - 这适用于 GF 与 JBoss 4.X。就我所见，JBoss 5.X 中的 JMS 实现进行了彻底的修改，所以也许这种说法不再正确
4. WebServices 在 GlassFish 上运行得更好，我在 JBoss 上使用更高级的配置遇到了许多问题
5. GlassFish 拥有更多的超高端企业附加组件，例如 HA-Database，将用户会话存储在数据库中的集群中，而不是在内存中，因此无论发生什么灾难，都可以进行完整的故障转移
6. JBoss比较流行，有很多管理员，开发人员，知道它，所以更容易找到可以在JBoss上开发的人，网络上也有更多的资源。有时这更重要，然后是一种解决方案相对于另一种解决方案的技术优势。
7. GlassFish 对开发人员更友好。在 GF 3 上重新部署 Web 应用程序大约持续一秒钟 - 为了实现 JBoss 的这种重新部署速度，我需要 JRebel。此外，如果有人使用 NetBeans，还有许多非常有用的智能向导。
8. 由于甲骨文收购了SUN，GlassFish的未来并不确定。现在 Oracle 声称它会支持它，但谁知道这种支持会是什么样子以及它会持续多久。尽管 GlassFish 是开源的，但几乎没有人愿意为自己的需要开发应用服务器......

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.

在我看来，GF 更容易管理，从纯技术的角度来看是更好的解决方案，但它远不那么受欢迎，而且前途未卜。

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

我与 RedHat/JBoss 或 SUN/GlassFish 没有任何联系，我的公司 (erudis.pl) 正在支持和开发这两种服务器。

回答by Pelegri

(disclaimer: I work at Sun and I am in the GF team)

（免责声明：我在Sun工作，我在GF团队）

I agree that Seam works fine on GlassFish; see https://blogs.oracle.com/theaquarium/tags/seam

我同意 Seam 在 GlassFish 上运行良好；见https://blogs.oracle.com/theaquarium/tags/seam

GFv3 is quite different than JBoss 5; in particular:

GFv3 与 JBoss 5 完全不同；特别是：

• GFv3 is based on OSGi while JBoss 5's kernel is based on JMX.
• GFv3 supports JavaEE 6; JBoss 5 supports Java EE 5.

• GFv3 基于 OSGi，而 JBoss 5 的内核基于 JMX。
• GFv3 支持 JavaEE 6；JBoss 5 支持 Java EE 5。

GFv3 is designed to be very modular; services start on demand, there is an update center repository, etc. GFv3 is significantly smaller than JBoss 5 and will start much faster. JBoss 5.1 GA is listed as 130MB; GFv3Preview is 50MB. GFv3 starts in a couple of seconds; JBoss in tens (you should try the startup for your own platform).

GFv3 的设计非常模块化；服务按需启动，有更新中心存储库等。GFv3 比 JBoss 5 小得多，启动速度也快得多。JBoss 5.1 GA 被列为 130MB；GFv3Preview 为 50MB。GFv3 会在几秒钟内启动；几十个 JBoss（你应该尝试为你自己的平台启动）。

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

还有其他不同之处，有些是从 GlassFish v2 继承而来的，例如图形管理控制台或管理 CLI。

A more direct comparison for JBoss 5 would be the GlassFish v2 releases, which are based on Java EE 5. The latest release in that family is GFv2.1, with a GFv2.1.1 release scheduled in October (see https://blogs.oracle.com/theaquarium/entry/schedule_for_glassfish_v2_1).

与 JBoss 5 更直接的比较是基于 Java EE 5 的 GlassFish v2 版本。该系列中的最新版本是 GFv2.1，GFv2.1.1 版本计划于 10 月发布（请参阅https://blogs. oracle.com/theaquarium/entry/schedule_for_glassfish_v2_1）。

Sun also provides patch releases of GlassFish (akin to RedHat's support for JBoss); see https://blogs.oracle.com/glassfishforbusinessand sun.com/glassfish.

Sun 还提供了 GlassFish 的补丁版本（类似于 RedHat 对 JBoss 的支持）；请参阅 https://blogs.oracle.com/glassfishforbusiness和 sun.com/glassfish。

回答by Baron Von Moose'coque

It's strictly what you're used to. I found configuring and using JBoss to be about as pleasing as trying to shave with a jagged spoon while riding a unicycle with no seat. Glassfish however, just seems to work.

这完全是你习惯的。我发现配置和使用 JBoss 就像骑着没有座位的独轮车尝试用锯齿状的勺子刮胡子一样令人愉快。然而，Glassfish 似乎有效。

回答by Mike

My choice is Glassfish: it is faster to start-up, to deploy web applications. the Admin console is very accurate, moreover it is both graphical and command-line. Now it is fully-supported by Oracle, its future is not uncertain any more. It is based upon OSGi: it is really modular. You can install Spring-osgi applications easly. You can freely choice between Eclipse Link , Apache Open JPA and Hibernate without pain. It is greatly integrated in NetBeans (and, of course, Eclipse).

我的选择是 Glassfish：启动和部署 Web 应用程序更快。管理控制台非常准确，而且它既是图形化的又是命令行的。现在它得到了 Oracle 的全面支持，它的未来不再是不确定的。它基于 OSGi：它是真正的模块化。您可以轻松安装 Spring-osgi 应用程序。您可以毫不费力地在 Eclipse Link 、Apache Open JPA 和 Hibernate 之间自由选择。它在 NetBeans（当然还有 Eclipse）中得到了极大的集成。

On the other hand, Jboss is more widespread and thus it is easy to find job on it (IMHO because it is an old App Server; glassfish is relatively new).

另一方面，Jboss 使用更广泛，因此很容易找到工作（恕我直言，因为它是一个旧的应用服务器；glassfish 相对较新）。

回答by Navi

I started developing a Seam application on JBoss and after a few months tried to get it working on Glassfish. I found the Glassfish enviroment very counterintuitive. I had to fix some strange errors on GF and I could not find any information on the web so after a few days I gave up and went back to JBoss. So personally I would not recommend Glassfish.

我开始在 JBoss 上开发一个 Seam 应用程序，几个月后试图让它在 Glassfish 上运行。我发现 Glassfish 环境非常违反直觉。我不得不在 GF 上修复一些奇怪的错误，但我在网上找不到任何信息，所以几天后我放弃并回到 JBoss。所以我个人不推荐 Glassfish。

回答by Ashoka

I will have to go with Glassfish on this. Deploying a diverse range of application built on different webservices, we had major compatibility issues, resulting in customizing the class loading & still faced many issues. Glassfish I never faced any such issues.

在这方面，我将不得不与 Glassfish 合作。部署构建在不同 Web 服务上的各种应用程序，我们遇到了重大的兼容性问题，导致自定义类加载并仍然面临许多问题。Glassfish 我从来没有遇到过这样的问题。