Best practices for concurrency

Am 20.10.2012 um 17:53 schrieb The Trainspotter: > Hi, > > I've read through the online example on server concurrency, however, currently I'm not running a BaseXServer instance I'm just running things locally. I want multiple threads in my application to be able to query the database at once without treading on each others toes. What's the best approach for doing this? > > I have tried querying the database using different threads but I keep getting internal BaseX errors which leads me to think I'm going about this the wrong way. > > Cheers > Gary > _______________________________________________ > BaseX-Talk mailing list > BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de > https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk

On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Andreas Weiler <andreas.weiler at uni-konstanz.de> wrote: > Hi Gary, > > best approach is to run a local server and then use client sessions. > If you dont want to run a server, you need one seperate context for each > thread. > > -- Andreas > > Am 20.10.2012 um 17:53 schrieb The Trainspotter: > > Hi, > > I've read through the online example on server concurrency, however, > currently I'm not running a BaseXServer instance I'm just running things > locally. I want multiple threads in my application to be able to query the > database at once without treading on each others toes. What's the best > approach for doing this? > > I have tried querying the database using different threads but I keep > getting internal BaseX errors which leads me to think I'm going about this > the wrong way. > > Cheers > Gary > _______________________________________________ > BaseX-Talk mailing list > BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de > https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk > > > > _______________________________________________ > BaseX-Talk mailing list > BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de > https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >

On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Andreas Weiler <andreas.weiler at uni-konstanz.de> wrote: > Hi Gary, > > best approach is to run a local server and then use client sessions. > If you dont want to run a server, you need one seperate context for each > thread. > > -- Andreas > > Am 20.10.2012 um 17:53 schrieb The Trainspotter: > > Hi, > > I've read through the online example on server concurrency, however, > currently I'm not running a BaseXServer instance I'm just running things > locally. I want multiple threads in my application to be able to query the > database at once without treading on each others toes. What's the best > approach for doing this? > > I have tried querying the database using different threads but I keep > getting internal BaseX errors which leads me to think I'm going about this > the wrong way. > > Cheers > Gary > _______________________________________________ > BaseX-Talk mailing list > BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de > https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk > > > > _______________________________________________ > BaseX-Talk mailing list > BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de > https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >

> Thank-you both. I'm currently creating new context before executing queries > on the local database and it seems to be handling the concurrency well > already, but I guess I may have just been lucky so far. I'll add the > LocalSession bit and see how that works out. > > Cheers > Gary > ________________________________ > From: Christian Grün <christian.gruen at gmail.com> > To: Andreas Weiler <andreas.weiler at uni-konstanz.de> > Cc: The Trainspotter <wys01 at btinternet.com>; > "basex-talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de" <basex-talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de> > Sent: Tuesday, 23 October 2012, 12:55 > Subject: Re: [basex-talk] Best practices for concurrency > > Hi Gary, > > as Andreas mentioned, the server approach will ensure that all > operations will be concurrently handled. An alternative, however, is > to create a LocalSession instance, which provides the same interface > and functionality as the ClientSession class, but does not rely on a > database server. A little example (I hope I didn't introduce any > typos): > > Context ctx = new Context(); > LocalSession ls = new LocalSession(ctx); > ls.execute(new CreateDB("db", "<a/>")); > System.out.println(ls.execute(new XQuery("db:open('db')"))); > ctx.close(); > > Best, > Christian > ___________________________ > > On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Andreas Weiler > <andreas.weiler at uni-konstanz.de> wrote: >> Hi Gary, >> >> best approach is to run a local server and then use client sessions. >> If you dont want to run a server, you need one seperate context for each >> thread. >> >> -- Andreas >> >> Am 20.10.2012 um 17:53 schrieb The Trainspotter: >> >> Hi, >> >> I've read through the online example on server concurrency, however, >> currently I'm not running a BaseXServer instance I'm just running things >> locally. I want multiple threads in my application to be able to query the >> database at once without treading on each others toes. What's the best >> approach for doing this? >> >> I have tried querying the database using different threads but I keep >> getting internal BaseX errors which leads me to think I'm going about this >> the wrong way. >> >> Cheers >> Gary >> _______________________________________________ >> BaseX-Talk mailing list >> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> BaseX-Talk mailing list >> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >> > >

> Hello BaseX-Team, > > it is great to see the vibrant evolution of your BaseX development. > > We have a component that is at the moment on (the now outdated) BaseX > 7.0.2 and the > component uses > > * local databases (to make it as independent as possible from the > environment where it runs) > * and XQJ. > > Now we want to migrate this component to BaseX 7.3/BaseX 7.5. > > But all the examples of the new (1.2.x) version of basex-xqj use the > client server architecture, > and it is stressed in the documentation: > > "BaseX XQJ communicates with a BaseX Server via a client-server > architecture, > where BaseX XQJ acts as the client and the BaseX XML Database acts as > the server.", see page 3 in [1] > > Question: > > Can BaseX 7.3/BaseX7.5 access a local database with XQJ? > > With best regards > > Andreas > > [1] BaseX XQJ Documenation, Version 1.2.3, 1th October 2012 > > > _______________________________________________ > BaseX-Talk mailing list > BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de > https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk > >

On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Andreas Rulle <andreas.rulle at nexoma.de> wrote: > Hello BaseX-Team, > > this mail informs you about the further steps that have been done in this > point: > > 1. Search for source code > > I have not been able to find the source code for basex-xqj-1.2.3.zip. A > question would be if the source code > for this module is available. (Just find the answer to the question "in the > source code"). > > 2. JavaDoc > > The JavaDoc says: > > "This implementation internally creates Socket connections with a BaseX > Server" see [1] > > From point 2. I would conclude that it is not possible to use a > local/"embedded" database with the new XQJ. > > With best regards, > > Andreas > > > [1] basex-xqj-1.2.3/doc/javadoc/net/xqj/basex/BaseXXQDataSource.html > >> Hello BaseX-Team, >> >> it is great to see the vibrant evolution of your BaseX development. >> >> We have a component that is at the moment on (the now outdated) BaseX >> 7.0.2 and the >> component uses >> >> * local databases (to make it as independent as possible from the >> environment where it runs) >> * and XQJ. >> >> Now we want to migrate this component to BaseX 7.3/BaseX 7.5. >> >> But all the examples of the new (1.2.x) version of basex-xqj use the >> client server architecture, >> and it is stressed in the documentation: >> >> "BaseX XQJ communicates with a BaseX Server via a client-server >> architecture, >> where BaseX XQJ acts as the client and the BaseX XML Database acts as the >> server.", see page 3 in [1] >> >> Question: >> >> Can BaseX 7.3/BaseX7.5 access a local database with XQJ? >> >> With best regards >> >> Andreas >> >> [1] BaseX XQJ Documenation, Version 1.2.3, 1th October 2012 >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> BaseX-Talk mailing list >> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > BaseX-Talk mailing list > BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de > https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk

> Hi Andreas, > > as you correctly observed, the old XQJ implementation has been > discontinued, and our current XQJ implementation is based on the > client/server architecture. We already thought about providing a local > version as well. The (closed source) implementation would be > completely up to Charles Foster, and I imagine it could take some time > to finalize, so please don't expect any short-term miracles. Charles > might give you more details just in case. > > Christian > ___________________________ > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Andreas Rulle <andreas.rulle at nexoma.de> wrote: >> Hello BaseX-Team, >> >> this mail informs you about the further steps that have been done in this >> point: >> >> 1. Search for source code >> >> I have not been able to find the source code for basex-xqj-1.2.3.zip. A >> question would be if the source code >> for this module is available. (Just find the answer to the question "in the >> source code"). >> >> 2. JavaDoc >> >> The JavaDoc says: >> >> "This implementation internally creates Socket connections with a BaseX >> Server" see [1] >> >> From point 2. I would conclude that it is not possible to use a >> local/"embedded" database with the new XQJ. >> >> With best regards, >> >> Andreas >> >> >> [1] basex-xqj-1.2.3/doc/javadoc/net/xqj/basex/BaseXXQDataSource.html >> >>> Hello BaseX-Team, >>> >>> it is great to see the vibrant evolution of your BaseX development. >>> >>> We have a component that is at the moment on (the now outdated) BaseX >>> 7.0.2 and the >>> component uses >>> >>> * local databases (to make it as independent as possible from the >>> environment where it runs) >>> * and XQJ. >>> >>> Now we want to migrate this component to BaseX 7.3/BaseX 7.5. >>> >>> But all the examples of the new (1.2.x) version of basex-xqj use the >>> client server architecture, >>> and it is stressed in the documentation: >>> >>> "BaseX XQJ communicates with a BaseX Server via a client-server >>> architecture, >>> where BaseX XQJ acts as the client and the BaseX XML Database acts as the >>> server.", see page 3 in [1] >>> >>> Question: >>> >>> Can BaseX 7.3/BaseX7.5 access a local database with XQJ? >>> >>> With best regards >>> >>> Andreas >>> >>> [1] BaseX XQJ Documenation, Version 1.2.3, 1th October 2012 >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> BaseX-Talk mailing list >>> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >>> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> BaseX-Talk mailing list >> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk > _______________________________________________ > BaseX-Talk mailing list > BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de > https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk > >

On 24 October 2012 12:41, Christian Grün <christian.gruen at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Andreas, > > as you correctly observed, the old XQJ implementation has been > discontinued, and our current XQJ implementation is based on the > client/server architecture. We already thought about providing a local > version as well. The (closed source) implementation would be > completely up to Charles Foster, and I imagine it could take some time > to finalize, so please don't expect any short-term miracles. Charles > might give you more details just in case. > > Christian > ___________________________ > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Andreas Rulle <andreas.rulle at nexoma.de> wrote: >> Hello BaseX-Team, >> >> this mail informs you about the further steps that have been done in this >> point: >> >> 1. Search for source code >> >> I have not been able to find the source code for basex-xqj-1.2.3.zip. A >> question would be if the source code >> for this module is available. (Just find the answer to the question "in the >> source code"). >> >> 2. JavaDoc >> >> The JavaDoc says: >> >> "This implementation internally creates Socket connections with a BaseX >> Server" see [1] >> >> From point 2. I would conclude that it is not possible to use a >> local/"embedded" database with the new XQJ. >> >> With best regards, >> >> Andreas >> >> >> [1] basex-xqj-1.2.3/doc/javadoc/net/xqj/basex/BaseXXQDataSource.html >> >>> Hello BaseX-Team, >>> >>> it is great to see the vibrant evolution of your BaseX development. >>> >>> We have a component that is at the moment on (the now outdated) BaseX >>> 7.0.2 and the >>> component uses >>> >>> * local databases (to make it as independent as possible from the >>> environment where it runs) >>> * and XQJ. >>> >>> Now we want to migrate this component to BaseX 7.3/BaseX 7.5. >>> >>> But all the examples of the new (1.2.x) version of basex-xqj use the >>> client server architecture, >>> and it is stressed in the documentation: >>> >>> "BaseX XQJ communicates with a BaseX Server via a client-server >>> architecture, >>> where BaseX XQJ acts as the client and the BaseX XML Database acts as the >>> server.", see page 3 in [1] >>> >>> Question: >>> >>> Can BaseX 7.3/BaseX7.5 access a local database with XQJ? >>> >>> With best regards >>> >>> Andreas >>> >>> [1] BaseX XQJ Documenation, Version 1.2.3, 1th October 2012 >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> BaseX-Talk mailing list >>> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >>> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> BaseX-Talk mailing list >> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >

> Hi Andreas, > > A local / embedded version of BaseX XQJ, (i.e. no Socket connection) > is planned for BaseX XQJ 1.3 > > The primary aim will be to have as much compatibility as possible with > the client/server based version [1] > > This is not a quick job and I wouldn't expect anything soon. Perhaps > in the next 2 months or so. > > In the meantime, I suggest that you at least test your software > against the Client / Server XQJ driver, because although unlikely, > there "may" be differences in behaviour between the the version of > BaseX XQJ driver you're currently using and the XQJ.NET > implementation. > > If your code needs to change as a result of switching drivers, you > will get foresight on those changes in advance. > > Kind Regards, > > Charles > > [1] http://xqj.net/basex > > On 24 October 2012 12:41, Christian Grün <christian.gruen at gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Andreas, >> >> as you correctly observed, the old XQJ implementation has been >> discontinued, and our current XQJ implementation is based on the >> client/server architecture. We already thought about providing a local >> version as well. The (closed source) implementation would be >> completely up to Charles Foster, and I imagine it could take some time >> to finalize, so please don't expect any short-term miracles. Charles >> might give you more details just in case. >> >> Christian >> ___________________________ >> >> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Andreas Rulle <andreas.rulle at nexoma.de> wrote: >>> Hello BaseX-Team, >>> >>> this mail informs you about the further steps that have been done in this >>> point: >>> >>> 1. Search for source code >>> >>> I have not been able to find the source code for basex-xqj-1.2.3.zip. A >>> question would be if the source code >>> for this module is available. (Just find the answer to the question "in the >>> source code"). >>> >>> 2. JavaDoc >>> >>> The JavaDoc says: >>> >>> "This implementation internally creates Socket connections with a BaseX >>> Server" see [1] >>> >>> From point 2. I would conclude that it is not possible to use a >>> local/"embedded" database with the new XQJ. >>> >>> With best regards, >>> >>> Andreas >>> >>> >>> [1] basex-xqj-1.2.3/doc/javadoc/net/xqj/basex/BaseXXQDataSource.html >>> >>>> Hello BaseX-Team, >>>> >>>> it is great to see the vibrant evolution of your BaseX development. >>>> >>>> We have a component that is at the moment on (the now outdated) BaseX >>>> 7.0.2 and the >>>> component uses >>>> >>>> * local databases (to make it as independent as possible from the >>>> environment where it runs) >>>> * and XQJ. >>>> >>>> Now we want to migrate this component to BaseX 7.3/BaseX 7.5. >>>> >>>> But all the examples of the new (1.2.x) version of basex-xqj use the >>>> client server architecture, >>>> and it is stressed in the documentation: >>>> >>>> "BaseX XQJ communicates with a BaseX Server via a client-server >>>> architecture, >>>> where BaseX XQJ acts as the client and the BaseX XML Database acts as the >>>> server.", see page 3 in [1] >>>> >>>> Question: >>>> >>>> Can BaseX 7.3/BaseX7.5 access a local database with XQJ? >>>> >>>> With best regards >>>> >>>> Andreas >>>> >>>> [1] BaseX XQJ Documenation, Version 1.2.3, 1th October 2012 >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> BaseX-Talk mailing list >>>> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >>>> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> BaseX-Talk mailing list >>> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >>> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk > _______________________________________________ > BaseX-Talk mailing list > BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de > https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk > >

> Hello Charles, > > thank you for your detailed answer. > > Your answer enables us to make an "informed decision". > > We have been interested in a bug-fix in that is contained in BaseX > 7.3. But there > is a logical workaround for this. > > This workaround is better than to dismiss XQJ now and change the > architecture > of the software. > > With our answer we can wait with an update of BaseX until XQJ 1.3 is > there, because > it will come in the "near future". > > With best regards > > Andreas > > > >> Hi Andreas, >> >> A local / embedded version of BaseX XQJ, (i.e. no Socket connection) >> is planned for BaseX XQJ 1.3 >> >> The primary aim will be to have as much compatibility as possible with >> the client/server based version [1] >> >> This is not a quick job and I wouldn't expect anything soon. Perhaps >> in the next 2 months or so. >> >> In the meantime, I suggest that you at least test your software >> against the Client / Server XQJ driver, because although unlikely, >> there "may" be differences in behaviour between the the version of >> BaseX XQJ driver you're currently using and the XQJ.NET >> implementation. >> >> If your code needs to change as a result of switching drivers, you >> will get foresight on those changes in advance. >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> Charles >> >> [1] http://xqj.net/basex >> >> On 24 October 2012 12:41, Christian Grün <christian.gruen at gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> Hi Andreas, >>> >>> as you correctly observed, the old XQJ implementation has been >>> discontinued, and our current XQJ implementation is based on the >>> client/server architecture. We already thought about providing a local >>> version as well. The (closed source) implementation would be >>> completely up to Charles Foster, and I imagine it could take some time >>> to finalize, so please don't expect any short-term miracles. Charles >>> might give you more details just in case. >>> >>> Christian >>> ___________________________ >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Andreas Rulle >>> <andreas.rulle at nexoma.de> wrote: >>>> Hello BaseX-Team, >>>> >>>> this mail informs you about the further steps that have been done >>>> in this >>>> point: >>>> >>>> 1. Search for source code >>>> >>>> I have not been able to find the source code for >>>> basex-xqj-1.2.3.zip. A >>>> question would be if the source code >>>> for this module is available. (Just find the answer to the question >>>> "in the >>>> source code"). >>>> >>>> 2. JavaDoc >>>> >>>> The JavaDoc says: >>>> >>>> "This implementation internally creates Socket connections with a >>>> BaseX >>>> Server" see [1] >>>> >>>> From point 2. I would conclude that it is not possible to use a >>>> local/"embedded" database with the new XQJ. >>>> >>>> With best regards, >>>> >>>> Andreas >>>> >>>> >>>> [1] basex-xqj-1.2.3/doc/javadoc/net/xqj/basex/BaseXXQDataSource.html >>>> >>>>> Hello BaseX-Team, >>>>> >>>>> it is great to see the vibrant evolution of your BaseX development. >>>>> >>>>> We have a component that is at the moment on (the now outdated) BaseX >>>>> 7.0.2 and the >>>>> component uses >>>>> >>>>> * local databases (to make it as independent as possible from the >>>>> environment where it runs) >>>>> * and XQJ. >>>>> >>>>> Now we want to migrate this component to BaseX 7.3/BaseX 7.5. >>>>> >>>>> But all the examples of the new (1.2.x) version of basex-xqj use the >>>>> client server architecture, >>>>> and it is stressed in the documentation: >>>>> >>>>> "BaseX XQJ communicates with a BaseX Server via a client-server >>>>> architecture, >>>>> where BaseX XQJ acts as the client and the BaseX XML Database acts >>>>> as the >>>>> server.", see page 3 in [1] >>>>> >>>>> Question: >>>>> >>>>> Can BaseX 7.3/BaseX7.5 access a local database with XQJ? >>>>> >>>>> With best regards >>>>> >>>>> Andreas >>>>> >>>>> [1] BaseX XQJ Documenation, Version 1.2.3, 1th October 2012 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> BaseX-Talk mailing list >>>>> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >>>>> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> BaseX-Talk mailing list >>>> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >>>> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >> _______________________________________________ >> BaseX-Talk mailing list >> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > BaseX-Talk mailing list > BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de > https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >

> Hello Christian, > > your BaseX database is with RESTXQ on very interesting road towards xquery > based web applications > and the Unit Module puts XQuery into a new software engineering perspective! > > While this application field naturally leads to a client/server architecture > we have an expanding row of usages of BaseX in embedded mode, see for > example [1]. > > At the moment the Basex 7.7 still has basex-xqj-1.2.3.jar. > > Question: Are there plans to update to the upcoming (?) version > basex-xqj-1.3.jar? > > With best regards, > > Andreas > > [1] See slide 21 in PBSeasy - Magento und Big Data, > http://www.meet-magento.de/programm/andreas-rulle-programm-meet-magento.html, > Abruf 18.06.2013 > > Hello Charles, > > thank you for your detailed answer. > > Your answer enables us to make an "informed decision". > > We have been interested in a bug-fix in that is contained in BaseX 7.3. But > there > is a logical workaround for this. > > This workaround is better than to dismiss XQJ now and change the > architecture > of the software. > > With our answer we can wait with an update of BaseX until XQJ 1.3 is there, > because > it will come in the "near future". > > With best regards > > Andreas > > > > Hi Andreas, > > A local / embedded version of BaseX XQJ, (i.e. no Socket connection) > is planned for BaseX XQJ 1.3 > > The primary aim will be to have as much compatibility as possible with > the client/server based version [1] > > This is not a quick job and I wouldn't expect anything soon. Perhaps > in the next 2 months or so. > > In the meantime, I suggest that you at least test your software > against the Client / Server XQJ driver, because although unlikely, > there "may" be differences in behaviour between the the version of > BaseX XQJ driver you're currently using and the XQJ.NET > implementation. > > If your code needs to change as a result of switching drivers, you > will get foresight on those changes in advance. > > Kind Regards, > > Charles > > [1] http://xqj.net/basex > > On 24 October 2012 12:41, Christian Grün <christian.gruen at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Andreas, > > as you correctly observed, the old XQJ implementation has been > discontinued, and our current XQJ implementation is based on the > client/server architecture. We already thought about providing a local > version as well. The (closed source) implementation would be > completely up to Charles Foster, and I imagine it could take some time > to finalize, so please don't expect any short-term miracles. Charles > might give you more details just in case. > > Christian > ___________________________ > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Andreas Rulle <andreas.rulle at nexoma.de> > wrote: > > Hello BaseX-Team, > > this mail informs you about the further steps that have been done in this > point: > > 1. Search for source code > > I have not been able to find the source code for basex-xqj-1.2.3.zip. A > question would be if the source code > for this module is available. (Just find the answer to the question "in the > source code"). > > 2. JavaDoc > > The JavaDoc says: > > "This implementation internally creates Socket connections with a BaseX > Server" see [1] > > From point 2. I would conclude that it is not possible to use a > local/"embedded" database with the new XQJ. > > With best regards, > > Andreas > > > [1] basex-xqj-1.2.3/doc/javadoc/net/xqj/basex/BaseXXQDataSource.html > > Hello BaseX-Team, > > it is great to see the vibrant evolution of your BaseX development. > > We have a component that is at the moment on (the now outdated) BaseX > 7.0.2 and the > component uses > > * local databases (to make it as independent as possible from the > environment where it runs) > * and XQJ. > > Now we want to migrate this component to BaseX 7.3/BaseX 7.5. > > But all the examples of the new (1.2.x) version of basex-xqj use the > client server architecture, > and it is stressed in the documentation: > > "BaseX XQJ communicates with a BaseX Server via a client-server > architecture, > where BaseX XQJ acts as the client and the BaseX XML Database acts as the > server.", see page 3 in [1] > > Question: > > Can BaseX 7.3/BaseX7.5 access a local database with XQJ? > > With best regards > > Andreas > > [1] BaseX XQJ Documenation, Version 1.2.3, 1th October 2012 > > > _______________________________________________ > BaseX-Talk mailing list > BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de > https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk > > > _______________________________________________ > BaseX-Talk mailing list > BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de > https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk > > _______________________________________________ > BaseX-Talk mailing list > BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de > https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk > > > > _______________________________________________ > BaseX-Talk mailing list > BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de > https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk > > > > -- > Nexoma GmbH - Ihre Agentur für Apps, Online Shops und elektronische > Produktkataloge > Niederlassung Paderborn > Technologiepark 20 > 33100 Paderborn > > Internet: www.nexoma.de > Amtsgericht Arnsberg, HRB 9365 > Geschäftsführer: Guido Sauerland > > _______________________________________________ > BaseX-Talk mailing list > BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de > https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >

> Hi Andreas, > > in the last weeks, Charles Foster has been pretty busy organizing the > fabulous XMLLondon Conference that just took place last weekend [1]. > He may have more time to focus on the embedded version of XQJ in the > upcoming months. If you believe it’s helpful for your product, and if > you would be interested to sponsor the feature, feel free to contact > us for more details. > > Best, > Christian > > [1] http://xmllondon.com > ___________________________ > > 2013/6/18 Andreas Rulle <andreas.rulle at nexoma.de>: >> Hello Christian, >> >> your BaseX database is with RESTXQ on very interesting road towards xquery >> based web applications >> and the Unit Module puts XQuery into a new software engineering perspective! >> >> While this application field naturally leads to a client/server architecture >> we have an expanding row of usages of BaseX in embedded mode, see for >> example [1]. >> >> At the moment the Basex 7.7 still has basex-xqj-1.2.3.jar. >> >> Question: Are there plans to update to the upcoming (?) version >> basex-xqj-1.3.jar? >> >> With best regards, >> >> Andreas >> >> [1] See slide 21 in PBSeasy - Magento und Big Data, >> http://www.meet-magento.de/programm/andreas-rulle-programm-meet-magento.html, >> Abruf 18.06.2013 >> >> Hello Charles, >> >> thank you for your detailed answer. >> >> Your answer enables us to make an "informed decision". >> >> We have been interested in a bug-fix in that is contained in BaseX 7.3. But >> there >> is a logical workaround for this. >> >> This workaround is better than to dismiss XQJ now and change the >> architecture >> of the software. >> >> With our answer we can wait with an update of BaseX until XQJ 1.3 is there, >> because >> it will come in the "near future". >> >> With best regards >> >> Andreas >> >> >> >> Hi Andreas, >> >> A local / embedded version of BaseX XQJ, (i.e. no Socket connection) >> is planned for BaseX XQJ 1.3 >> >> The primary aim will be to have as much compatibility as possible with >> the client/server based version [1] >> >> This is not a quick job and I wouldn't expect anything soon. Perhaps >> in the next 2 months or so. >> >> In the meantime, I suggest that you at least test your software >> against the Client / Server XQJ driver, because although unlikely, >> there "may" be differences in behaviour between the the version of >> BaseX XQJ driver you're currently using and the XQJ.NET >> implementation. >> >> If your code needs to change as a result of switching drivers, you >> will get foresight on those changes in advance. >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> Charles >> >> [1] http://xqj.net/basex >> >> On 24 October 2012 12:41, Christian Grün <christian.gruen at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Andreas, >> >> as you correctly observed, the old XQJ implementation has been >> discontinued, and our current XQJ implementation is based on the >> client/server architecture. We already thought about providing a local >> version as well. The (closed source) implementation would be >> completely up to Charles Foster, and I imagine it could take some time >> to finalize, so please don't expect any short-term miracles. Charles >> might give you more details just in case. >> >> Christian >> ___________________________ >> >> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Andreas Rulle <andreas.rulle at nexoma.de> >> wrote: >> >> Hello BaseX-Team, >> >> this mail informs you about the further steps that have been done in this >> point: >> >> 1. Search for source code >> >> I have not been able to find the source code for basex-xqj-1.2.3.zip. A >> question would be if the source code >> for this module is available. (Just find the answer to the question "in the >> source code"). >> >> 2. JavaDoc >> >> The JavaDoc says: >> >> "This implementation internally creates Socket connections with a BaseX >> Server" see [1] >> >> From point 2. I would conclude that it is not possible to use a >> local/"embedded" database with the new XQJ. >> >> With best regards, >> >> Andreas >> >> >> [1] basex-xqj-1.2.3/doc/javadoc/net/xqj/basex/BaseXXQDataSource.html >> >> Hello BaseX-Team, >> >> it is great to see the vibrant evolution of your BaseX development. >> >> We have a component that is at the moment on (the now outdated) BaseX >> 7.0.2 and the >> component uses >> >> * local databases (to make it as independent as possible from the >> environment where it runs) >> * and XQJ. >> >> Now we want to migrate this component to BaseX 7.3/BaseX 7.5. >> >> But all the examples of the new (1.2.x) version of basex-xqj use the >> client server architecture, >> and it is stressed in the documentation: >> >> "BaseX XQJ communicates with a BaseX Server via a client-server >> architecture, >> where BaseX XQJ acts as the client and the BaseX XML Database acts as the >> server.", see page 3 in [1] >> >> Question: >> >> Can BaseX 7.3/BaseX7.5 access a local database with XQJ? >> >> With best regards >> >> Andreas >> >> [1] BaseX XQJ Documenation, Version 1.2.3, 1th October 2012 >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> BaseX-Talk mailing list >> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> BaseX-Talk mailing list >> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >> >> _______________________________________________ >> BaseX-Talk mailing list >> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> BaseX-Talk mailing list >> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >> >> >> >> -- >> Nexoma GmbH - Ihre Agentur für Apps, Online Shops und elektronische >> Produktkataloge >> Niederlassung Paderborn >> Technologiepark 20 >> 33100 Paderborn >> >> Internet: www.nexoma.de >> Amtsgericht Arnsberg, HRB 9365 >> Geschäftsführer: Guido Sauerland >> >> _______________________________________________ >> BaseX-Talk mailing list >> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >>

On 18 Jun 2013, at 17:13, Andreas Rulle <andreas.rulle at nexoma.de> wrote: > Hello Christian, > > thank you for your quick response. > > Your hint to the possibility to sponsor this feature has been discussed > with the management. > > At the beginning of the road is was important for us to have XQJ as a JDBC like > interface for a looser coupling of the components. > > Now, after building more and more trust into the BaseX, the direct > access to the evolving feature set of the BaseX database seems to have > become more important. > > During the mentioned discussion the decision evolved to directly > use the BaseX-Api and substitute the XQJ dependency for the embedded > components in one of our next iterations. > > Sounds like an effect of the familiar embrace and extend strategy, see [1], of a well > known software company ;-) > > With best regards, > > Andreas > > [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish >> Hi Andreas, >> >> in the last weeks, Charles Foster has been pretty busy organizing the >> fabulous XMLLondon Conference that just took place last weekend [1]. >> He may have more time to focus on the embedded version of XQJ in the >> upcoming months. If you believe it’s helpful for your product, and if >> you would be interested to sponsor the feature, feel free to contact >> us for more details. >> >> Best, >> Christian >> >> [1] http://xmllondon.com >> ___________________________ >> >> 2013/6/18 Andreas Rulle <andreas.rulle at nexoma.de>: >>> Hello Christian, >>> >>> your BaseX database is with RESTXQ on very interesting road towards xquery >>> based web applications >>> and the Unit Module puts XQuery into a new software engineering perspective! >>> >>> While this application field naturally leads to a client/server architecture >>> we have an expanding row of usages of BaseX in embedded mode, see for >>> example [1]. >>> >>> At the moment the Basex 7.7 still has basex-xqj-1.2.3.jar. >>> >>> Question: Are there plans to update to the upcoming (?) version >>> basex-xqj-1.3.jar? >>> >>> With best regards, >>> >>> Andreas >>> >>> [1] See slide 21 in PBSeasy - Magento und Big Data, >>> http://www.meet-magento.de/programm/andreas-rulle-programm-meet-magento.html, >>> Abruf 18.06.2013 >>> >>> Hello Charles, >>> >>> thank you for your detailed answer. >>> >>> Your answer enables us to make an "informed decision". >>> >>> We have been interested in a bug-fix in that is contained in BaseX 7.3. But >>> there >>> is a logical workaround for this. >>> >>> This workaround is better than to dismiss XQJ now and change the >>> architecture >>> of the software. >>> >>> With our answer we can wait with an update of BaseX until XQJ 1.3 is there, >>> because >>> it will come in the "near future". >>> >>> With best regards >>> >>> Andreas >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi Andreas, >>> >>> A local / embedded version of BaseX XQJ, (i.e. no Socket connection) >>> is planned for BaseX XQJ 1.3 >>> >>> The primary aim will be to have as much compatibility as possible with >>> the client/server based version [1] >>> >>> This is not a quick job and I wouldn't expect anything soon. Perhaps >>> in the next 2 months or so. >>> >>> In the meantime, I suggest that you at least test your software >>> against the Client / Server XQJ driver, because although unlikely, >>> there "may" be differences in behaviour between the the version of >>> BaseX XQJ driver you're currently using and the XQJ.NET >>> implementation. >>> >>> If your code needs to change as a result of switching drivers, you >>> will get foresight on those changes in advance. >>> >>> Kind Regards, >>> >>> Charles >>> >>> [1] http://xqj.net/basex >>> >>> On 24 October 2012 12:41, Christian Grün <christian.gruen at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Andreas, >>> >>> as you correctly observed, the old XQJ implementation has been >>> discontinued, and our current XQJ implementation is based on the >>> client/server architecture. We already thought about providing a local >>> version as well. The (closed source) implementation would be >>> completely up to Charles Foster, and I imagine it could take some time >>> to finalize, so please don't expect any short-term miracles. Charles >>> might give you more details just in case. >>> >>> Christian >>> ___________________________ >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Andreas Rulle <andreas.rulle at nexoma.de> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hello BaseX-Team, >>> >>> this mail informs you about the further steps that have been done in this >>> point: >>> >>> 1. Search for source code >>> >>> I have not been able to find the source code for basex-xqj-1.2.3.zip. A >>> question would be if the source code >>> for this module is available. (Just find the answer to the question "in the >>> source code"). >>> >>> 2. JavaDoc >>> >>> The JavaDoc says: >>> >>> "This implementation internally creates Socket connections with a BaseX >>> Server" see [1] >>> >>> From point 2. I would conclude that it is not possible to use a >>> local/"embedded" database with the new XQJ. >>> >>> With best regards, >>> >>> Andreas >>> >>> >>> [1] basex-xqj-1.2.3/doc/javadoc/net/xqj/basex/BaseXXQDataSource.html >>> >>> Hello BaseX-Team, >>> >>> it is great to see the vibrant evolution of your BaseX development. >>> >>> We have a component that is at the moment on (the now outdated) BaseX >>> 7.0.2 and the >>> component uses >>> >>> * local databases (to make it as independent as possible from the >>> environment where it runs) >>> * and XQJ. >>> >>> Now we want to migrate this component to BaseX 7.3/BaseX 7.5. >>> >>> But all the examples of the new (1.2.x) version of basex-xqj use the >>> client server architecture, >>> and it is stressed in the documentation: >>> >>> "BaseX XQJ communicates with a BaseX Server via a client-server >>> architecture, >>> where BaseX XQJ acts as the client and the BaseX XML Database acts as the >>> server.", see page 3 in [1] >>> >>> Question: >>> >>> Can BaseX 7.3/BaseX7.5 access a local database with XQJ? >>> >>> With best regards >>> >>> Andreas >>> >>> [1] BaseX XQJ Documenation, Version 1.2.3, 1th October 2012 >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> BaseX-Talk mailing list >>> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >>> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> BaseX-Talk mailing list >>> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >>> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> BaseX-Talk mailing list >>> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >>> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> BaseX-Talk mailing list >>> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >>> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Nexoma GmbH - Ihre Agentur für Apps, Online Shops und elektronische >>> Produktkataloge >>> Niederlassung Paderborn >>> Technologiepark 20 >>> 33100 Paderborn >>> >>> Internet: www.nexoma.de >>> Amtsgericht Arnsberg, HRB 9365 >>> Geschäftsführer: Guido Sauerland >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> BaseX-Talk mailing list >>> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >>> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >>> > > > -- > Nexoma GmbH - Ihre Agentur für Apps, Online Shops und elektronische Produktkataloge > Niederlassung Paderborn > Technologiepark 20 > 33100 Paderborn > Tel.: + 49 (0) 52 51 1615 63 > Mail: andreas.rulle at nexoma.de > > Internet: www.nexoma.de > Amtsgericht Arnsberg, HRB 9365 > Geschäftsführer: Guido Sauerland

> Hi Andreas, > > Not sure if you got my previous e-mail? > > If you want, I can send you BaseX XQJ 1.3 which has a local/embedded implementation of XQDataSource? > > The only reason for not releasing it officially was because of being extremely busy with other things like XML London and writing further documentation for the XQJ drivers. > > Kind Regards, > > Charles > > > On 18 Jun 2013, at 17:13, Andreas Rulle <andreas.rulle at nexoma.de> wrote: > >> Hello Christian, >> >> thank you for your quick response. >> >> Your hint to the possibility to sponsor this feature has been discussed >> with the management. >> >> At the beginning of the road is was important for us to have XQJ as a JDBC like >> interface for a looser coupling of the components. >> >> Now, after building more and more trust into the BaseX, the direct >> access to the evolving feature set of the BaseX database seems to have >> become more important. >> >> During the mentioned discussion the decision evolved to directly >> use the BaseX-Api and substitute the XQJ dependency for the embedded >> components in one of our next iterations. >> >> Sounds like an effect of the familiar embrace and extend strategy, see [1], of a well >> known software company ;-) >> >> With best regards, >> >> Andreas >> >> [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish >>> Hi Andreas, >>> >>> in the last weeks, Charles Foster has been pretty busy organizing the >>> fabulous XMLLondon Conference that just took place last weekend [1]. >>> He may have more time to focus on the embedded version of XQJ in the >>> upcoming months. If you believe it’s helpful for your product, and if >>> you would be interested to sponsor the feature, feel free to contact >>> us for more details. >>> >>> Best, >>> Christian >>> >>> [1] http://xmllondon.com >>> ___________________________ >>> >>> 2013/6/18 Andreas Rulle <andreas.rulle at nexoma.de>: >>>> Hello Christian, >>>> >>>> your BaseX database is with RESTXQ on very interesting road towards xquery >>>> based web applications >>>> and the Unit Module puts XQuery into a new software engineering perspective! >>>> >>>> While this application field naturally leads to a client/server architecture >>>> we have an expanding row of usages of BaseX in embedded mode, see for >>>> example [1]. >>>> >>>> At the moment the Basex 7.7 still has basex-xqj-1.2.3.jar. >>>> >>>> Question: Are there plans to update to the upcoming (?) version >>>> basex-xqj-1.3.jar? >>>> >>>> With best regards, >>>> >>>> Andreas >>>> >>>> [1] See slide 21 in PBSeasy - Magento und Big Data, >>>> http://www.meet-magento.de/programm/andreas-rulle-programm-meet-magento.html, >>>> Abruf 18.06.2013 >>>> >>>> Hello Charles, >>>> >>>> thank you for your detailed answer. >>>> >>>> Your answer enables us to make an "informed decision". >>>> >>>> We have been interested in a bug-fix in that is contained in BaseX 7.3. But >>>> there >>>> is a logical workaround for this. >>>> >>>> This workaround is better than to dismiss XQJ now and change the >>>> architecture >>>> of the software. >>>> >>>> With our answer we can wait with an update of BaseX until XQJ 1.3 is there, >>>> because >>>> it will come in the "near future". >>>> >>>> With best regards >>>> >>>> Andreas >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Andreas, >>>> >>>> A local / embedded version of BaseX XQJ, (i.e. no Socket connection) >>>> is planned for BaseX XQJ 1.3 >>>> >>>> The primary aim will be to have as much compatibility as possible with >>>> the client/server based version [1] >>>> >>>> This is not a quick job and I wouldn't expect anything soon. Perhaps >>>> in the next 2 months or so. >>>> >>>> In the meantime, I suggest that you at least test your software >>>> against the Client / Server XQJ driver, because although unlikely, >>>> there "may" be differences in behaviour between the the version of >>>> BaseX XQJ driver you're currently using and the XQJ.NET >>>> implementation. >>>> >>>> If your code needs to change as a result of switching drivers, you >>>> will get foresight on those changes in advance. >>>> >>>> Kind Regards, >>>> >>>> Charles >>>> >>>> [1] http://xqj.net/basex >>>> >>>> On 24 October 2012 12:41, Christian Grün <christian.gruen at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Andreas, >>>> >>>> as you correctly observed, the old XQJ implementation has been >>>> discontinued, and our current XQJ implementation is based on the >>>> client/server architecture. We already thought about providing a local >>>> version as well. The (closed source) implementation would be >>>> completely up to Charles Foster, and I imagine it could take some time >>>> to finalize, so please don't expect any short-term miracles. Charles >>>> might give you more details just in case. >>>> >>>> Christian >>>> ___________________________ >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Andreas Rulle <andreas.rulle at nexoma.de> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hello BaseX-Team, >>>> >>>> this mail informs you about the further steps that have been done in this >>>> point: >>>> >>>> 1. Search for source code >>>> >>>> I have not been able to find the source code for basex-xqj-1.2.3.zip. A >>>> question would be if the source code >>>> for this module is available. (Just find the answer to the question "in the >>>> source code"). >>>> >>>> 2. JavaDoc >>>> >>>> The JavaDoc says: >>>> >>>> "This implementation internally creates Socket connections with a BaseX >>>> Server" see [1] >>>> >>>> From point 2. I would conclude that it is not possible to use a >>>> local/"embedded" database with the new XQJ. >>>> >>>> With best regards, >>>> >>>> Andreas >>>> >>>> >>>> [1] basex-xqj-1.2.3/doc/javadoc/net/xqj/basex/BaseXXQDataSource.html >>>> >>>> Hello BaseX-Team, >>>> >>>> it is great to see the vibrant evolution of your BaseX development. >>>> >>>> We have a component that is at the moment on (the now outdated) BaseX >>>> 7.0.2 and the >>>> component uses >>>> >>>> * local databases (to make it as independent as possible from the >>>> environment where it runs) >>>> * and XQJ. >>>> >>>> Now we want to migrate this component to BaseX 7.3/BaseX 7.5. >>>> >>>> But all the examples of the new (1.2.x) version of basex-xqj use the >>>> client server architecture, >>>> and it is stressed in the documentation: >>>> >>>> "BaseX XQJ communicates with a BaseX Server via a client-server >>>> architecture, >>>> where BaseX XQJ acts as the client and the BaseX XML Database acts as the >>>> server.", see page 3 in [1] >>>> >>>> Question: >>>> >>>> Can BaseX 7.3/BaseX7.5 access a local database with XQJ? >>>> >>>> With best regards >>>> >>>> Andreas >>>> >>>> [1] BaseX XQJ Documenation, Version 1.2.3, 1th October 2012 >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> BaseX-Talk mailing list >>>> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >>>> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> BaseX-Talk mailing list >>>> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >>>> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> BaseX-Talk mailing list >>>> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >>>> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> BaseX-Talk mailing list >>>> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >>>> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Nexoma GmbH - Ihre Agentur für Apps, Online Shops und elektronische >>>> Produktkataloge >>>> Niederlassung Paderborn >>>> Technologiepark 20 >>>> 33100 Paderborn >>>> >>>> Internet: www.nexoma.de >>>> Amtsgericht Arnsberg, HRB 9365 >>>> Geschäftsführer: Guido Sauerland >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> BaseX-Talk mailing list >>>> BaseX-Talk at mailman.uni-konstanz.de >>>> https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/basex-talk >>>> >> >> -- >> Nexoma GmbH - Ihre Agentur für Apps, Online Shops und elektronische Produktkataloge >> Niederlassung Paderborn >> Technologiepark 20 >> 33100 Paderborn >> Tel.: + 49 (0) 52 51 1615 63 >> Mail: andreas.rulle at nexoma.de >> >> Internet: www.nexoma.de >> Amtsgericht Arnsberg, HRB 9365 >> Geschäftsführer: Guido Sauerland >