December 2006 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: Last chance for any changes to the 2.0.0 API

by manik.surtani＠jboss.com

"genman" wrote : | I "proposed" the API to access the node SPI should be Node.getNodeSPI(). This was cleaner rather than having to make an iffy cast all the time. I believe that a Cache.getCacheSPI() would be for the best. | -1, see my comment on the post above. I want to protect internals from client code. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3995353#3995353 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3995353

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: Last chance for any changes to the 2.0.0 API

by manik.surtani＠jboss.com

"ben.wang(a)jboss.com" wrote : It is hard to say exactly what do I need from CacheSPI (or NodeSPI) now. When will you check in the new API or has it been updated in the Wiki? | | I have thought people who wants to customize the Cache behavior should use CacheSPI. Or has it been changed? | Not really a case of customisation, more a case of being able to access cache internals. What I meant was extensions and plugins would be able to use the CacheSPI. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3995352#3995352 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3995352

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: Last chance for any changes to the 2.0.0 API

by manik.surtani＠jboss.com

"bstansberry(a)jboss.com" wrote : Another thing I've thought about is renaming the TreeCache class to CacheImpl or something. We don't code to be written against the TreeCache class itself. There's a lot of legacy code written that way; changing the class name forces a shift to the new API. | +1, this is a good idea. "bstansberry(a)jboss.com" wrote : | A kinder gentler way is to create CacheImpl, and then make TreeCache a trivial subclass. Then mark TreeCache deprecated with a comment it will be removed in 2.1 or 2.2. Do we really want this? Like you said we don't want people talking to the implementation directly at all, especially since we can't guarantee correct behaviour with the interceptor chains, etc. I'd rather remove this altogether, like you said forcing people to write to the new API. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3995351#3995351 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3995351

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: Last chance for any changes to the 2.0.0 API

by manik.surtani＠jboss.com

"bstansberry(a)jboss.com" wrote : | If we're exposing the TM directly via the Cache interface, I don't need that. Having the cache stick a ref to its TM in Configuration.runtime would serve the need. Don't we expose this via the runtime right now? | cache.getConfiguration().getRuntimeConfig().getTransactionManager(); | If this is enough I'll move getTransactionManager() from Cache to CacheSPI. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3995349#3995349 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3995349

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Moving forward with the profile service mgmt api

by charles.crouch＠jboss.com

"scott.stark(a)jboss.org" wrote : | It can be. The piece that is missing is how does the profile service take a ManagedObject populated with a set of changes, and then merge that into the base DeploymentContext metadata attachments to create the predetermined attachments that override the raw deployment values. The missing mapping is the attachment name, and the corresponding metdata object property(s). In general a ManagedObject properties are going to map to several different metadata objects/properties. | | The ManagementView also needs to be updated to support applying a ManagedObject change. I don't see that the ManagedObject returned from the ManagementView is hooked up to the attachments it overrides, therefore, this needs to be a write step. | Ok, is this something you are going to looking at, or Adrian? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3995345#3995345 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3995345

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: Last chance for any changes to the 2.0.0 API

by manik.surtani＠jboss.com

"genman" wrote : | Also, you probably noticed I made a bunch of additions to NodeSPI. These probably need some review before finalization, I would think. | Yes, why is there a getChildrenMap() on NodeSPI(), doesn't Node.getChildren() (returns a Set) suffise? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3995344#3995344 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3995344

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: Ordering of Synchronizations between JBC and Hibernate

by manik.surtani＠jboss.com

No, making JBC an XA resource in 2.0.0 is probably quite unfeasible. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3995341#3995341 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3995341

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: Last chance for any changes to the 2.0.0 API

by manik.surtani＠jboss.com

anonymous wrote : | org.jboss.cache.marshall.ObjectStreamFactory | | public ObjectInputStream createObjectInputStream(InputStream in) throws IOException; | | JavaObjectStreamFactory and JBossObjectStreamFactory would implement it. | | VAM would add: | | public Object objectFromInputStream(InputStream is) throws Exception | | Yeah I'm ok with this. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3995337#3995337 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3995337

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: Serialization Compatibility Tests

by bstansberry＠jboss.com

Use the 'code' button. :) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3995328#3995328 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3995328

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: Serialization Compatibility Tests

by pavel.tsekov＠redhat.com

Ouch. The board strips the XML tags :( View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3995327#3995327 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3995327

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums December 2006