To: Claude who wrote (37478 ) 2/6/2000 8:48:00 PM From: mozek Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 74651
As for SUN ripping off MTS, that is a joke right? Actually, the model for transaction support in MTS was invented at Microsoft. This was never part of Corba. All you need to do to verify this is look at the similarity between setting up, completing, and rolling back/aborting a transaction in EJB and MTS, then look for something similar prior to MTS. You won't find it.I have evaluated MTS and the performance against other app servers is dreadful If you're interested in understanding how the two systems compare in performance, take a look at the performance/scalability on Win2K, the most recent MTS implementation. You'll find, at times, orders of magnitude better performance than NT4, which is already running numerous, high volume sites on the Web. Then, choose the best implementation of EJB (likely the most recent Weblogic server) for comparison.This is not a holy war for me. I am interested in intelligent discussion - not childish accusations about my motives for posting. My statement was that I had not taken the time to look at your other posts. I was open to the possibility that the information about easily writing MTS components in Java would be irrelevant to you if you were biased. I did not accuse you of anything, but it seems that your quite rude post doth protest too much. Now that I have looked at your other posts, I see that while you are likely not on a Jihad, you may not be entirely unbiased:Message 11662950 As far as any bias I may have, I do not try to hide that potential, but I do attempt to be objective.My post was meant to illicit a dialogue with Jean and I wanted to start the ball rolling by posting why I think EJB/Corba is better in contrast to his assertion of the contrary. Your post adds nothing to that discourse. If you want to carry on a private conversation, you can easily click on Jean's personal profile and send a private message. Otherwise, I believe that public postings are open to public response. Thanks, Mike