September 2006 - jboss-dev-forums

[Design of JBoss Remoting, Unified Invokers] - Re: Have remoting support a non invocation based model

by timfox

BTW - I am not talking about the task for implementation of the APR transport. I'm talking about extending the remoting API so it can deal with any abstract non invocation based model - concrete implementations of this could use APR, Java NBIO or whatever. In my mind the base abstraction for this would be a bi directional "channel", either end of which can have bytes read from/written to in a non blocking fashion. This is similar to what ActiveIO does, and Apache MINA (although wraps it with a lot more abstractions) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3971228#3971228 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3971228

19 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Remoting, Unified Invokers] - Re: Have remoting support a non invocation based model

by timfox

"ovidiu.feodorov(a)jboss.com" wrote : It is my understanding that Remoting team has this on their agenda. Is there a JIRA task for this? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3971223#3971223 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3971223

19 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: how to keep a history of the task's of a process

by dsrkreddy

Hi Thanks to one and all . really this help's me a lot . now iam looking to create another workflow which stores this task's as item and subitem for every process.. and so iam not sure this may resolve my issue .. but mean while i have this option..todo..... and once again thanks everyone.. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3971211#3971211 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3971211

19 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Security on JBoss] - Re: Split of Security Project into SPI and JBossAS Implement

by anil.saldhana＠jboss.com

Must be a copy oversight (as surely security does not depend on Saaj) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3971166#3971166 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3971166

19 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: JBMESSAGING-541 - Multiple connections on a single threa

by clebert.suconic＠jboss.com

Today I cut the testcase until the minimal point of the failure. Basically if you close the first connection (Where Client was created) Lease would stop working. A testcase that would cause Lease to stop would be: conn1 = cf.createConnection(); | conn1.setClientID("test1"); | conn1.start(); | | conn2 = cf.createConnection(); | conn2.setClientID("test2"); | conn2.start(); | | conn1.close(); I added ClientCrashTest::testClientCrashWithTwoConnections which is calling CreateTwoClientOnServerCommand on the server side. The test consistenly fails. Clebert Suconic View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3971156#3971156 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3971156

19 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Remoting, Unified Invokers] - Re: Have remoting support a non invocation based model

by ovidiu.feodorov＠jboss.com

It is my understanding that Remoting team has this on their agenda. For the time being we are using a request-response model, and we will migrate to an asynchronous model as soon as it becomes available. This is a local change, it won't affect our functional tests suite (or it shouldn't, at least). It can only improve perfomance. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3971139#3971139 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3971139

19 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Remoting, Unified Invokers] - Have remoting support a non invocation based model

by timfox

Hi Tom et al As we move further ahead with JBoss Messaging, we're going to need to provide a non blocking approach to processing requests on the server. I.e. on the server side: Read some data (non blocking) from the socket and pass it to JBM to process it. Some time later (if the request requires a response) and probably on a different thread then JBM needs to write some data onto the socket. The reads and writes need to be decoupled, so we can provide SEDA or related style processing models. Currently, remoting seems to exclusively work with a blocking, invocation based model. What I mean by this is that a thread blocks until the request arrives, the request is executed and a response is written back, all using the same thread. So the read and write is coupled - (this is the "invocation") Similarly on the client side, for many of our use cases we simply want to write to the socket and return immediately - we do not want to send an "invocation" and wait for a response. The current remoting model client model does not seem to support this. I believe the request to extend the Client API to support an asynchronous send has already been logged with a JIRA task. In order to provide the desired server side functionality, I guess we would need the remoting API to be extended so that we can write onto the socket, decoupled from the invocation. Also we would need to provide an invocation type that didn't write a response back onto the socket. Wdyt? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3971136#3971136 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3971136

19 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Security on JBoss] - Re: Split of Security Project into SPI and JBossAS Implement

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

I updated the project to have a valid eclipse project setup. We need to convert this to maven2 and remove these jars as they need to come from the repository. What is the reason for including the jars with ? by them? | jboss-auth.jar | jboss-j2ee.jar | jboss-j2se.jar ? | jboss-jaxrpc.jar ? | jboss-jmx-compliance.jar ? | jboss-mbeans.jar | jboss-saaj.jar ? | jboss-system.jar | jboss-transaction.jar ? | jnpserver.jar | View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3971130#3971130 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3971130

19 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Remoting, Unified Invokers] - Moving core o.j.invocation classes to common

by bstansberry＠jboss.com

With the effort underway to consolidate the client-side interceptor models, a problem that comes up is where to put some of the core org.jboss.invocation classes, e.g. org.jboss.invocation.Invocation. http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBREM-385 says the old invokers will move to remoting, so Remoting will need access to these classes. So leaving them in the AS server module is no good; don't want remoting depending on AS/server. Depending on how we refactor, some code in an independent cluster binary might have the same problem. Moving them to Remoting could work, but smells funny due to the widespread usage of these classes in the AS. For example, org.jboss.ejb.plugins.cmp.jdbc.JDBCRelationInterceptor would be importing a class from Remoting, which seems a bit odd. A logical place for these is in common-core. What do people (Scott/Adrian) think about moving them there? I worked out what I think would need to be moved, all in o.j.invocation: Invocation InvocationContext InvocationKey InvocationType Invoker JBossLazyUnmarshallingException MarshalledInvocation MarshalledValue MarshalledValueInputStream MarshalledValueOutputStream PayloadKey SecurityActions Regardless of what is decided about the rest of the classes, the JBoss Cache people would like to see MarshalledValueIn(Out)putStream moved. Those are true utility classes, and JBC uses them. Moving them to common-core would make it possible to eliminate jboss-minimal.jar from the standalone JBC distribution. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3971127#3971127 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3971127

19 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Is it possible to know within an ActionHandler, the even

by kukeltje

Hi, This is a question for the userforum. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3971122#3971122 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3971122

19 years, 6 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 September 2006