Re: Look Mom - No Application Servers

[Pete Helgren <Pete@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for the information. We are certainly in a great position being 
on the iSeries.  Your first scenarios work OK for me, one System i or a 
System i on the DMZ.  However if the System i was the only platform in 
the mix, and I have had some customers as adamant about "iSeries or 
nothing" as the folks who are "Microsoft or nothing", then my loads of 
cheap Linux boxes would be loads of Linux partitions to a System i only 
shop.  That is OK.  System i can handle that.

I have seen several RPG CGI type applications that are easier to 
implement, than going the Java route, in an RPG only shop.  They follow 
coding styles similar to 5250 style I/O and RPG programmers just "get 
it".  We have two divisions of programmers in our company: RPG folks who 
live and breath the stuff and are much more productive developing web 
based apps using a CGI framework and Java guys who can crank out 
Struts/Tiles stuff in their sleep.  Both are productive.  Both 
comfortable with the tools they use.  All of which runs on the System 
i.  I am OK with that.  I happen to be one of the few who work both 
sides, trying to keep the technologies and frameworks close enough so 
that our end users are oblivious to what, under the covers, is running 
the code (Is it RPG or Java?).  I wish there was something that allowed 
templates and DB I/O to be shared more fully, but we are holding our 
own.  Very cool stuff, regardless of language.

I wasn't aware that "JSPs eventually compile down to machine code."  I 
assumed that JSP compiled to servlets which ran in a JVM which meant it 
was still "interpreted" to some extent.  But then, I haven't spent a lot 
of time pondering the internals of Java. Interesting information.  Using 
AXIS for exposing Java web services was really simple.  But, I'll take a 
look at JAX.  Can't imagine how it could get even easier but I can 
always use better tools and API's in my Java development.

Agreed that Java has many more tools and ready made API's.  But, I 
wouldn't use that as the sole rationale for not developing RPG 
equivalents.  There are some "pain points" that I think could be 
addressed in RPG that would encourage more application modernization and 
would give RPG programmers a more comfortable environment to grow from.  
Not everyone enjoys jumping into Java, PHP, and other non-RPG web 
technologies.  The success of the System i platform, is, to some extent, 
still tied to RPG programmers so I'll continue to pursue tools that pull 
them into the 21st century.

Pete

Joe Pluta wrote:

> That's just not the direction I'd take.  I'd certainly keep all business
> logic in RPG, but I'd much rather have the web serving piece in Java, for at
> least two different reasons.
>
> First, the plethora of web handling code that I don't have to write.  I
> mean, you're going to have a browser interface, right?  Well, all the
> session handling stuff is already there for me, I don't have to rewrite it
> all.  All the web services stuff is already in place as well.  Have you seen
> the JAX code?  It makes Web Services look like child's play.  There are a
> wide variety of frameworks available, and even some framework-aware IDEs.
> Reinventing all those wheels for RPG is just a bad idea, especially since
> JSPs eventually compile down to machine code.  No matter how sophisticated
> your RPG-CGI code is, at the end of the day you're still parsing and
> plugging templates.
>
> Second, I can offload the interface piece.  Depending on my business
> requirements, I can have everything on one System i, or I can put a second
> System i in the DMZ, or I can use a whole battery of cheap Linux boxes for
> failover and load balancing, or any of a number of different configurations
> that I just don't get with RPG.
>
> So unless you have some sort of aversion to Java, there's simply no good
> reason to use RPG for your web tier.
>
> Joe
>
>