CXF, Restlet, Resteasy, jersey contrast

CXF, Restlet, Resteasy, jersey contrast

I. Description of requirements

Because of the need for the new system call interface to use the JSR311 Specification standard Rest Architecture Web service. Consider later in the product may often use the rest architecture of the webservice, for the mainstream implementation of the architecture for research, testing, comparison, to find a relatively good implementation. The main implementation of the preliminary research is:

L Jersey

L Resteasy

L Restlet

l Apache CXF Ii. Evaluation of various aspects 1. Integration Capability

all implementations support the integration of servlet and spring, without any fundamental differences. 2. Stability

each implementation on the application server for a long time running without errors, see the test report. 3. Performance

in the performance test, the Resteasy throughput rate is the best, Jersey second, restlet the worst, see the test report. 4. Maturity of product

various implementations support jsr311 versions 1.1 and 1.0, but Restlet supports jsr311 through the expansion package, and Resteasy supports EJBS because of jboss relationships, while Apache CXF supports a variety of WebService implementations. 5. Safety

Security, personally think that the webservice in the container to support security, it is a bit excessive, nothing more than data transmission encryption can meet most of the needs, and various implementations have done some support in this respect, other security aspects resteasy No special security strategy, Relies entirely on the container's security policy. 6. Ease of use

these things are very few Chinese documents, learning a little difficult, in my learning process feeling, development configuration is not difficult, but Jersey even English documents are relatively few. 7. Configurable capability

In terms of configuration, the basic file format (XML, text, JSON, and so on) is supported, and Restlet also supports many extensions and different platforms (Android, GAE, etc.). 8. maintainability

maintenance of the official documents are there, whether it is easy to read the code and modify the code, I do not have a long time to maintain, it is difficult to say. Third, summary

By comparison, these 4 jsr311 standard implementations, all aspects are not very different, highlighting the problem is too little documentation, especially in Chinese documents too little. The performance of the Resteasy is the best, Jersey second, CXF and Restlet the worst, which may be related to the complexity of the two implementations. For situations with special needs Apache CXF offers a variety of webservice,restlet to provide a variety of expansion packs, Resteasy for EJB support.

Test data See:

Http://wenku.baidu.com/view/edd686781711cc7931b716c4.html