Java PetStore Demo

[Hiranya Samarasekera]

Just installed the Sun's J2EE RI and deployed the PetStore application to
test.

when i loaded the index page of the PetStore for the first time, the program
started populating the DB, and ended with an error...

--------------
HTTP Status 404 - /supplier/populating.jsp
The requested resource (/supplier/populating.jsp) is not available.
--------------

Both the Cloudscape and the J2EE server seems to be running OK(i guess).
Am i doing something wrong... Please help.

Thanks in advance,
Hiranya Samarasekera
[www.theFutureMinders.com]

[Blob]

"Hiranya Samarasekera" <koluwa007@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Just installed the Sun's J2EE RI and deployed the PetStore application to
>test.
>
>when i loaded the index page of the PetStore for the first time, the program
>started populating the DB, and ended with an error...
>
>--------------
>HTTP Status 404 - /supplier/populating.jsp
>The requested resource (/supplier/populating.jsp) is not available.
>--------------
>
>Both the Cloudscape and the J2EE server seems to be running OK(i guess).
>Am i doing something wrong... Please help.
>
>Thanks in advance,
>Hiranya Samarasekera
>[www.theFutureMinders.com]
That's probably because it is SOOOOOOOOOOOO SLOOOOOOOOOOOOW. USE .NET

[kevin]

Grow up BLOB... U better find another forum, which talks about cheap buggy
technologies.

.NET simply sucks (and microsoft produts).
------------------------


"Blob" <blob@blobbloblboblo.com> wrote:
>
>"Hiranya Samarasekera" <koluwa007@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>Just installed the Sun's J2EE RI and deployed the PetStore application
to
>>test.
>>
>>when i loaded the index page of the PetStore for the first time, the program
>>started populating the DB, and ended with an error...
>>
>>--------------
>>HTTP Status 404 - /supplier/populating.jsp
>>The requested resource (/supplier/populating.jsp) is not available.
>>--------------
>>
>>Both the Cloudscape and the J2EE server seems to be running OK(i guess).
>>Am i doing something wrong... Please help.
>>
>>Thanks in advance,
>>Hiranya Samarasekera
>>[www.theFutureMinders.com]
>That's probably because it is SOOOOOOOOOOOO SLOOOOOOOOOOOOW. USE .NET

[raz]

I don't know where you get the info about .NET being "cheap and buggy". But
like most opinions on .NET from anyone in the Java camp, this one is severely
misinformed.

.NET is the most rock solid product microsoft has released to date. And
if your questioning its performance, take a look at the latest benchmark
done between the Java Petstore v2 (which is about 9 times faster than its
first version), with the .NET Petstore v2. You can download all the source
code on both parties, get all the hardware specs, what software was used
to benchmark both apps, etc. and see for yourself.



"kevin" <java.@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>Grow up BLOB... U better find another forum, which talks about cheap buggy
>technologies.
>
>.NET simply sucks (and microsoft produts).
>------------------------
>
>
>"Blob" <blob@blobbloblboblo.com> wrote:
>>
>>"Hiranya Samarasekera" <koluwa007@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Just installed the Sun's J2EE RI and deployed the PetStore application
>to
>>>test.
>>>
>>>when i loaded the index page of the PetStore for the first time, the program
>>>started populating the DB, and ended with an error...
>>>
>>>--------------
>>>HTTP Status 404 - /supplier/populating.jsp
>>>The requested resource (/supplier/populating.jsp) is not available.
>>>--------------
>>>
>>>Both the Cloudscape and the J2EE server seems to be running OK(i guess).
>>>Am i doing something wrong... Please help.
>>>
>>>Thanks in advance,
>>>Hiranya Samarasekera
>>>[www.theFutureMinders.com]
>>That's probably because it is SOOOOOOOOOOOO SLOOOOOOOOOOOOW. USE .NET
>

[MarkN]

I would have to agree that this comment is not valid (the .Net sucks one).
.Net is a pretty good product in and of itself. Is it perfect? No. I've
had it blow up on me (and not the beta version). And it has other issues.

But your comment isn't 100% valid either. I would say the poster is much
less misinformed and more blind. Of course, there are just as many of these
in the "MS camp" as in the "Java camp". (See the previous poster for reference)

As for ".NET is the most rock solid product microsoft has released to date"
- I'm not so sure that really means anything.

As for the "benchmark" - if one really tries to do as you suggest, reads
ALL the facts and isn't blinded either way - they will realize what this
"benchmark" means. Nothing. BTW, not all the software used is known. Some
have guessed as to which Java App servers were used.

FFR, I don't just live in the "Java camp".

"raz" <java.@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>I don't know where you get the info about .NET being "cheap and buggy".
But
>like most opinions on .NET from anyone in the Java camp, this one is severely
>misinformed.
>
>.NET is the most rock solid product microsoft has released to date. And
>if your questioning its performance, take a look at the latest benchmark
>done between the Java Petstore v2 (which is about 9 times faster than its
>first version), with the .NET Petstore v2. You can download all the source
>code on both parties, get all the hardware specs, what software was used
>to benchmark both apps, etc. and see for yourself.
>
>
>
>"kevin" <java.@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>>
>>Grow up BLOB... U better find another forum, which talks about cheap buggy
>>technologies.
>>
>>.NET simply sucks (and microsoft produts).
>>------------------------
>>
>>
>>"Blob" <blob@blobbloblboblo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>"Hiranya Samarasekera" <koluwa007@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Just installed the Sun's J2EE RI and deployed the PetStore application
>>to
>>>>test.
>>>>
>>>>when i loaded the index page of the PetStore for the first time, the
program
>>>>started populating the DB, and ended with an error...
>>>>
>>>>--------------
>>>>HTTP Status 404 - /supplier/populating.jsp
>>>>The requested resource (/supplier/populating.jsp) is not available.
>>>>--------------
>>>>
>>>>Both the Cloudscape and the J2EE server seems to be running OK(i guess).
>>>>Am i doing something wrong... Please help.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks in advance,
>>>>Hiranya Samarasekera
>>>>[www.theFutureMinders.com]
>>>That's probably because it is SOOOOOOOOOOOO SLOOOOOOOOOOOOW. USE .NET
>>
>

[raz]

I would agree on what you said. I guess I just got carried away. I also
work on both MS and Java technologies and I'd agree .NET isn't perfect either.

It would really be great if theserverside.com would launch a second round
of benchmark - but this time, get the best Java application server there
is in the market, have it run on Unix (or whatever is the most optimal OS),
and during the development of the version3, have the entire source code available
to the Java community -- open for examination and suggestions for further
optimisations.

But even so, Java will always have advantages that .NET will never have.
And probably vice versa.

I guess there's just enough room in the world for Java and .NET. Both are
splendid technologies, and for the two camps to argue against each other
would be like the baptist and the catholic having a debate against one another
- neither one bulging nor admitting to be incorrect.



"MarkN" <java.@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>I would have to agree that this comment is not valid (the .Net sucks one).
> .Net is a pretty good product in and of itself. Is it perfect? No. I've
>had it blow up on me (and not the beta version). And it has other issues.
>
>But your comment isn't 100% valid either. I would say the poster is much
>less misinformed and more blind. Of course, there are just as many of these
>in the "MS camp" as in the "Java camp". (See the previous poster for reference)
>
>As for ".NET is the most rock solid product microsoft has released to date"
>- I'm not so sure that really means anything.
>
>As for the "benchmark" - if one really tries to do as you suggest, reads
>ALL the facts and isn't blinded either way - they will realize what this
>"benchmark" means. Nothing. BTW, not all the software used is known.
Some
>have guessed as to which Java App servers were used.
>
>FFR, I don't just live in the "Java camp".
>
>"raz" <java.@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>>
>>I don't know where you get the info about .NET being "cheap and buggy".
> But
>>like most opinions on .NET from anyone in the Java camp, this one is severely
>>misinformed.
>>
>>.NET is the most rock solid product microsoft has released to date. And
>>if your questioning its performance, take a look at the latest benchmark
>>done between the Java Petstore v2 (which is about 9 times faster than its
>>first version), with the .NET Petstore v2. You can download all the source
>>code on both parties, get all the hardware specs, what software was used
>>to benchmark both apps, etc. and see for yourself.
>>
>>
>>
>>"kevin" <java.@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>>>
>>>Grow up BLOB... U better find another forum, which talks about cheap buggy
>>>technologies.
>>>
>>>.NET simply sucks (and microsoft produts).
>>>------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>"Blob" <blob@blobbloblboblo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>"Hiranya Samarasekera" <koluwa007@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Just installed the Sun's J2EE RI and deployed the PetStore application
>>>to
>>>>>test.
>>>>>
>>>>>when i loaded the index page of the PetStore for the first time, the
>program
>>>>>started populating the DB, and ended with an error...
>>>>>
>>>>>--------------
>>>>>HTTP Status 404 - /supplier/populating.jsp
>>>>>The requested resource (/supplier/populating.jsp) is not available.
>>>>>--------------
>>>>>
>>>>>Both the Cloudscape and the J2EE server seems to be running OK(i guess).
>>>>>Am i doing something wrong... Please help.
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks in advance,
>>>>>Hiranya Samarasekera
>>>>>[www.theFutureMinders.com]
>>>>That's probably because it is SOOOOOOOOOOOO SLOOOOOOOOOOOOW. USE .NET
>>>
>>
>

[MarkN]

Someone does need to reign in the extremists and that seems to be your message.
I didn't want that to get lost in the other stuff. I appreciate your repost.

I don't think another benchmark would serve any real purpose. There is just
no way to filter out enough variables to get a true and useful comparison.


BTW, theserverside didn't do the comparison. TMC did. The serverside only
published the 'results'. I did see an article from JDJ that interviewed
TMC and they said they basically needed more time and knew things weren't
as good as they could be but were under contract to publish the 'results'.
I think they made a major mistake in signing such a contract. They shouldn't
hide the truth - but there is very little truth flying around. Mostly misinformation
and misunderstanding and blindness.

Whatever the benchmarks say - We use Java to build systems that need to be
fast. Mainly because they run on multiple machines. Also because machines
are flinging product off and really can't stop. Java is more than sufficient.
Oh yeah, we use Swing on the clients.

"raz" <java.@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>I would agree on what you said. I guess I just got carried away. I also
>work on both MS and Java technologies and I'd agree .NET isn't perfect either.
>
>It would really be great if theserverside.com would launch a second round
>of benchmark - but this time, get the best Java application server there
>is in the market, have it run on Unix (or whatever is the most optimal OS),
>and during the development of the version3, have the entire source code
available
>to the Java community -- open for examination and suggestions for further
>optimisations.
>
>But even so, Java will always have advantages that .NET will never have.
> And probably vice versa.
>
>I guess there's just enough room in the world for Java and .NET. Both are
>splendid technologies, and for the two camps to argue against each other
>would be like the baptist and the catholic having a debate against one another
>- neither one bulging nor admitting to be incorrect.
>
>
>
>"MarkN" <java.@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>>
>>I would have to agree that this comment is not valid (the .Net sucks one).
>> .Net is a pretty good product in and of itself. Is it perfect? No.
I've
>>had it blow up on me (and not the beta version). And it has other issues.
>>
>>But your comment isn't 100% valid either. I would say the poster is much
>>less misinformed and more blind. Of course, there are just as many of
these
>>in the "MS camp" as in the "Java camp". (See the previous poster for reference)
>>
>>As for ".NET is the most rock solid product microsoft has released to date"
>>- I'm not so sure that really means anything.
>>
>>As for the "benchmark" - if one really tries to do as you suggest, reads
>>ALL the facts and isn't blinded either way - they will realize what this
>>"benchmark" means. Nothing. BTW, not all the software used is known.

>Some
>>have guessed as to which Java App servers were used.
>>
>>FFR, I don't just live in the "Java camp".
>>
>>"raz" <java.@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>>>
>>>I don't know where you get the info about .NET being "cheap and buggy".
>> But
>>>like most opinions on .NET from anyone in the Java camp, this one is severely
>>>misinformed.
>>>
>>>.NET is the most rock solid product microsoft has released to date. And
>>>if your questioning its performance, take a look at the latest benchmark
>>>done between the Java Petstore v2 (which is about 9 times faster than
its
>>>first version), with the .NET Petstore v2. You can download all the source
>>>code on both parties, get all the hardware specs, what software was used
>>>to benchmark both apps, etc. and see for yourself.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"kevin" <java.@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Grow up BLOB... U better find another forum, which talks about cheap
buggy
>>>>technologies.
>>>>
>>>>.NET simply sucks (and microsoft produts).
>>>>------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Blob" <blob@blobbloblboblo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>"Hiranya Samarasekera" <koluwa007@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Just installed the Sun's J2EE RI and deployed the PetStore application
>>>>to
>>>>>>test.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>when i loaded the index page of the PetStore for the first time, the
>>program
>>>>>>started populating the DB, and ended with an error...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>--------------
>>>>>>HTTP Status 404 - /supplier/populating.jsp
>>>>>>The requested resource (/supplier/populating.jsp) is not available.
>>>>>>--------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Both the Cloudscape and the J2EE server seems to be running OK(i guess).
>>>>>>Am i doing something wrong... Please help.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks in advance,
>>>>>>Hiranya Samarasekera
>>>>>>[www.theFutureMinders.com]
>>>>>That's probably because it is SOOOOOOOOOOOO SLOOOOOOOOOOOOW. USE .NET
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

[blob]

"MarkN" <java.@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>I would have to agree that this comment is not valid (the .Net sucks one).
> .Net is a pretty good product in and of itself. Is it perfect? No. I've
>had it blow up on me (and not the beta version).

How would that be? I didn't do Java Version 1, but please tell me what the
**** that was like?

>And it has other issues.
What are those?

>
>As for ".NET is the most rock solid product microsoft has released to date"
>- I'm not so sure that really means anything.
How so?

>As for the "benchmark" - if one really tries to do as you suggest, reads
>ALL the facts and isn't blinded either way - they will realize what this
>"benchmark" means. Nothing. BTW, not all the software used is known.
Some
>have guessed as to which Java App servers were used.
As I told you over in the VB group, tell me more about the serverside. They
are strictly a java shop(although you want to state otherwise) but now they
are out to make java look bad? Come on.

>FFR, I don't just live in the "Java camp".
Tell us what you do with .NET. I am very interested.

[MarkN]

Raz,
Here is a link to the interview I mentioned.

http://www.sys-con.com/java/articlenews.cfm?id=1739

Mark

[Raz]

I see...

Thanks for the info Mark.

Raz


"MarkN" <java.@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>Raz,
> Here is a link to the interview I mentioned.
>
>http://www.sys-con.com/java/articlenews.cfm?id=1739
>
>Mark