We could inject an implementation of ServiceInvoker that invokes
directly on the pipeline.
The BIG problem though is EPR publishing. JCA is not bi-directional.
Outbound and inflow are two separate things. Don't know enough about
outbound JCA yet, but we could possibly have a callback method or object
that creates a JCAOutput EPR. I'll read more into it.
Bill
Kurt T Stam wrote:
Well it'd be nice if we had JCA for listeners too no? It's to
bad a
gateway isn't a listener that takes extra params and we'd be done..
Bill Burke wrote:
> Kurt, I don't understand what you mean with "can we use JCA within the
> ESB", can u elaborate? I have a qa/junit test that uses the JMS
> adapter as a <jca-gateway>. See the wiki on where it is.
>
> Yes, you can use what I did to write gateways if that's what you're
> asking.
>
> Kurt T Stam wrote:
>> Cool.
>>
>> Hey can we use JCA within the ESB now too (I mean this work was specific
>> to a gateway right?)
>> , or is that still something you're working on?
>>
>> --K
>>
>> Bill Burke wrote:
>>> Kevin Conner wrote:
>>>> Kurt T Stam wrote:
>>>>> 1. So now we can use XA Txs spanning DB and JMS resources?
>>>> We should be able to, the XA transaction should encompass them both.
>>>>
>>>>> 2. I'm guessing we'd still be using the old JmsGateway when
>>>>> running in
>>>>> bootstrapper mode?
>>>> Weston had intended to develop a standalone implementation of JCA
>>>> which
>>>> would have been perfect for the standalone ESB. Not sure what will
>>>> happen to that now.
>>>>
>>>> Using JCA will necessitate the full blown app server or the esb
>>>> profile.
>>>>
>>> As I've said before, the JBoss Embeddable project *already* includes
>>> JCA and can run inside Junit tests, Tomcat standalone, and plain Java
>>> apps. Eventually I'll get around to refactoring it to run in other
>>> application servers.
>>>
>>> The JCA rewrite will continue. Supposedly Adrian was really itching
>>> to get back to it anyways. If he doesn't pick it up, I definately
>>> will. Really the brunt of the JCA rewrite is to pojitize it and remove
>>> any MBean dependencies or at least, make them "aspectized".
>>>
>>> The JCA integration I did with ESB should really be moved to the JCA
>>> project as it is an abstraction for any inflow container. MDB could
>>> be written on top of it. It has a bridge interface that would allow
>>> you to plug in other JCA implementations, well, at least in theory. I
>>> have no idea if any other app server has an SPI or even an API we
>>> could hack into. If we can't do that, we could probably still embed
>>> our own JCA implementation into another application server.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> 3. How does 'transacted' work? I mean an mdb has: supports,
>>>>> requiresNew,
>>>>> required, none.
>>>> MDB only supports Required and NotSupported transaction types as they
>>>> have no calling context. I would assume that the transacted attribute
>>>> would be equivalent.
>>>>
>>> The JCA integration layer I did is really a mini MDB container, so
>>> yes, that's what it means.
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
--
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat Inc.