January 2007 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: Issues with passivation of nested SFSBs

by bill.burke＠jboss.com

Furthermore, there can be multiple XPCs...I still think the parent owning all the instances makes the most sense and for the child to have the same lifecycle as the parent. I'm not sure there is anything in the spec that forbids us from doing this. What we could do is, when the parent gets removed, pick a new "master" SFSB to hold the references to the other SFSB instances as well as the XPCs. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4008574#4008574 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4008574

17 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: Issues with passivation of nested SFSBs

by bill.burke＠jboss.com

no it doesn't... Again, the big problem is managed entities. This is why all the SFSBs and XPC's need to be serialized together. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4008570#4008570 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4008570

17 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: Issues with passivation of nested SFSBs

by bstansberry＠jboss.com

"wolfc" wrote : I would rather have the SFSB register themselves as users in the XPC. The XPC then maintains this list. On @Remove SFSB deregisters and if XPC is empty close itself. OK. But only parent context holds a ref to the XPC, yes? Otherwise you have the problem of multiple contexts independently serializing/deserializing the XPC, after which you no longer have a shared reference. The XPC would need to know which context has the ref to it, so as part of the close process it can inform that context it no longer needs to be cached. It's the caching of the parent context that keeps the XPC from being gc'd. Unless we come up with a separate cache for these. Shit, if a call to a child bean triggers replication, the parent bean must be replicated as well, otherwise the XPC isn't. Perhaps separately caching XPCs makes sense. :( anonymous wrote : For injection: any SFSB with an XPC with creates a SFSB propagates the XPC with the exception of @Remote. Hmm... still don't like it, but there is no other way. Not clear exactly what you mean here. :) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4008561#4008561 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4008561

17 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: Issues with passivation of nested SFSBs

by wolfc

I would rather have the SFSB register themselves as users in the XPC. The XPC then maintains this list. On @Remove SFSB deregisters and if XPC is empty close itself. For injection: any SFSB with an XPC with creates a SFSB propagates the XPC with the exception of @Remote. Hmm... still don't like it, but there is no other way. The final part: orphaned SFSBs must be removed by a reaper as per spec after a timeout. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4008546#4008546 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4008546

17 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Duplicated client IDs

by timfox

I think this bug is a duplicate of http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBMESSAGING-286. It looks like an easy fix, you could do it now if you want. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4008533#4008533 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4008533

17 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Duplicated client IDs

by clebert.suconic＠jboss.com

I'm working on the integration testsuite, and one failing test is DuplicateClientIDUnitTestCase::testDuplicate. I wrote a similar test within JBossMessaging testsuite (org.jboss.test.jbossmessaging.test.DuplicateClientIDUnitTestCase) and the test is failing. If we decide this is not a bug, we will have to decide what to do on the integration testsuite. This is the JIRA issue: http://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBMESSAGING-791 View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4008529#4008529 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4008529

17 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: JBCACHE-957 Discussion Thread

by genman

I took a stab at the API, but I don't know well enough what to do with the 13-14 references to the old acquire calls. I uploaded my patch to the JIRA issue at the top. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4008523#4008523 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4008523

17 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Build System] - Cleanup of JBoss Maven plugins

by pgier

I believe the jboss version of the maven clean plugin is no longer needed. It is located here: https://svn.labs.jboss.org/labs/jbossbuild/trunk/projects/maven-plugins/m... It looks like it was created to add the functionality of configuring which directories are deleted when "mvn clean" is run. This is no longer needed because the regular maven clean plugin has this functionality. So if no one has a problem with me deleting it, I will remove it from subversion. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4008469#4008469 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4008469

17 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: Issues with passivation of nested SFSBs

by bill.burke＠jboss.com

I'm pretty sure that somehwere it says that XPC PC is not propagated across remote boundaries. That's another think I know we discussed in great detail on the expert group. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4008456#4008456 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4008456

17 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: Issues with passivation of nested SFSBs

by bstansberry＠jboss.com

I didn't see anything in section 5.6.2 about the sharing not applying to beans with an @Remote. But since it's possible such a nested bean isn't even in the same VM, that's probably too much to try to deal with. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4008447#4008447 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4008447

17 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums January 2007