[Design of JBoss Portal] - Re: LDAP Support expectations
by bvogt
"bvogt" wrote :
| On the other hand the LDAP based solution requires at least a service on the
| portal server (if CPUs and amount of memory permits this).
|
"bdaw" wrote :
| I don't understand.
|
"a service" means a running ldap server either on the same box or a different one.
"bvogt" wrote : With 2.6 a new let's say 'grouping feature' is introduced by means of the
| MembershipModule. For LDAP usage the is intended to be implemented, but (as I can see
| right now) for database not.
"bdraw" wrote :
| Nope. MembershipModule, UserModule, RoleModule and UserProfileModule is general API that hides the way you access identity objects. So both ldap and db will implement this.
|
Is the db part assigned to one already? If not, I can do it (because I need it ;-) ).
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3982616#3982616
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3982616
18 years, 2 months
[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: execution transitions, data flow and other associations
by tom.baeyens@jboss.com
anonymous wrote : Synchronization without merge
We had this once (i think it was called a milestone in jbpm 2). But probably it didn't make it to jbpm 3. I'll make sure this will re-enter in jbpm 4.
This is the same as the links in BPEL, right ?
anonymous wrote : Multi-Parented processes
Actually, what you need for this is variable colletion support :-) This requirement can be handled with 1 process variables e.g. called 'purposes' which is a collection of ProcessInstance's. jBPM is able to persist references to 'hibernatable' objects in the process variables. But jBPM doesn't yet handle collections. Meaning that if you put a collection of hibernatable objects as a process variable, this will be recognized as a serializable and the serialized value (a large one in case of a collection of process instances), will be stored in binary format in the db.
I'll try to add collection support in jbpm 4. Or do you think there is another (better) way of handling this requirement.?
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3982604#3982604
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3982604
18 years, 2 months
[Design of JBossCache] - JBC and RPC
by ben.wang@jboss.com
This has been discussed before regarding to the RPC functionality in JBossCache. In 1.4 and before, we have a "deprecated" RPCTreeCache to address the problem with a RPC layer to share the same channel with TreeCache itself such that a user can make a cache call along with her own RPC calls.
I can agree that JBossCache should detach itself from RPC functionality. However if I need to do JBC call along with RPC call, what can I do? I need two things:
1. A wrapper class similar RpcTreeCache for user to register the handler and also the callRemoteMethods. This should be fairly easy already by copying the RpcTreeCache that Brian did. So let's call this class RpcProvider. However, where does this class belong? We know HA-JNDI needs it in clustering. PojoCache will need it. And also some other users like this post: http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=93270
So a logical conclusion is that it should sit in JBC library maybe a package name like: org.jboss.cache.rpc.RpcProvider.
2. A way to create and obtain Jgroups multiplexer channel. This is pretty much provided inside JBossAS. However, for standalone mode, what's the best approach? Someone needs to create the jgroups channel and bind it into JMX. Then both JBC (already doing it) and RPCProvider will need to see if it needs to obtain a multiplexer channel. If RpcProvider is detached from JBC, then it will needs it own configuration xml to provide multiplexer service name. An extra file to deal with. So still not ideal. To me, if JBC can directly expose its channel to RpcProvider, then case solved.
What do people think?
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3982598#3982598
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3982598
18 years, 2 months