On 8/23/11 2:19 PM, Brian Stansberry wrote:
> On the other hand REJECT_SERVICE_RESTART is really a form of
safety
> checking / "babying" that could be pushed to the client, as long as we
> had some kind of metadata to tell them the change affects in-flight
> transactions.
>
It could, although true "babying" is only possible for a console or the
interactive CLI. A custom client or someone scripting CLI calls couldn't
be babied.
IMO really we should decide whether we protection like this first. If we
don't the problem disappears. Do we want some kind of gaurantee that
modifications do not (by default) affect in-flight transactions?
--
Jason T. Greene
JBoss AS Lead / EAP Platform Architect
JBoss, a division of Red Hat