[引用自spring的ppt]spring remote技术比较

Hessian

• Lightweight binary protocol by Caucho
• HTTP-based
• Uses custom serialization mechanism
• Support for several platforms
      PHP / Python / C++ / C# / Ruby / Java
• Problematic when using for example
      Hibernate lazy loading without OSIV
• HessianServiceExporter
• HessianProxyFactoryBean

Burlap

• XML-based lightweight protocol (Caucho)
• HTTP-based
• Uses custom serialization mechanism
• Known support only for Java
• Problematic when using for example Hibernate lazy loading without OSIV

Spring HttpInvoker

• Spring-based Java-to-Java remoting
• HTTP-based
• Uses Java serialization just like RMI
• Easy to setup(no HTTP tunneling as with RMI)
• HttpInvokerServiceExporter
• HttpInvokerProxyFactoryBean

RMI

• Plain-and-simple RMI
• With some additions:
      Converts checked RemoteExceptions to unchecked RemoteAccessExceptions
      Supports exposing plain Java interfaces
• Client support for both Spring-exposed as well as convential RMI endpoints
• RmiServiceExporter
• RmiProxyFactoryBean

RMI-IIOP / CORBA

• Ability to use RMI-IIOP implementation from vendor (see demo)
• Of course with the need for stubs and skeletons
• With a Spring-based client, still no need for java.rmi.Remote
• JndiRmiServiceExporter
• JndiRmiProxyFactoryBean

When to use what

• Both client and server under control
       Both Spring: HttpInvoker, Hessian, Burlap
       Low bandwidth: Hessian, Burlap(beware of complex object graphs)
       No servlet container: RMI(-IIOP)
• Only server under control: RMI
• Multiple client platforms: Hessian(or web services)
• Need for security: HttpInvoker or RMI