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

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: PojoCache uses a special node factory

by manik.surtani＠jboss.com

anonymous wrote : | | Sorry, but don't get it here. The first to access would have the WL on the parent and therefore creating a subsequent child node will go ahead becuase of the same transaction context. So only the other thread will block untill the first transaction is completed. Where is the deadlock here? | | Ok, I was assuming Nodes 1 and 2 were being read, not written. E.g., Tx1 ___ Read Node1 Write Node10 Tx2 ___ Read Node2 Write Node11 That would deadlock. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3999902#3999902 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3999902

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Variable instance (changing values)

by ricardojbdias

Hi there, I'm new to the forum. I am trying to use jBPM, but I do not want to use the variables that we can define on the modeler. I want to associate each activity or process state, in this case, its form, with some variables I have defined in a xml. How can this be done in a simple way? Thanks in advance. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3999875#3999875 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3999875

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: PojoCache uses a special node factory

by ben.wang＠jboss.com

"manik.surtani(a)jboss.com" wrote : Rather than allowing users to pre-create buckets in an internal node (makes me shudder!) how about doing something like allowing users to somehow provide information on the bucket a node should belong to, a bit like Object.hashCode()? | | We would probably want to use hashCode() on the Fqn as the primary way of determining which bucket the node goes in, but perhaps a mechanism of allowing the user to add a 'hint' to this would help. | Relaxed. I am not saying user will create internal node directly. If you read my post, I was suggesting to have a flag to use the id field as a prefix under "__JBossInternal__". :-) Hashcode is fine but that belongs to the Cache layer again of distributing them into hashed bucket. Two different ways of optimizing the node creation for user to pick. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3999874#3999874 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3999874

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: PojoCache uses a special node factory

by ben.wang＠jboss.com

"manik.surtani(a)jboss.com" wrote : anonymous wrote : | | This same deadlock can occur without buckets, even if nodes 1, 2, 10 and 11 had the same direct parent. | | Sorry, but don't get it here. The first to access would have the WL on the parent and therefore creating a subsequent child node will go ahead becuase of the same transaction context. So only the other thread will block untill the first transaction is completed. Where is the deadlock here? | View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3999870#3999870 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3999870

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: PojoCache uses a special node factory

by manik.surtani＠jboss.com

Rather than allowing users to pre-create buckets in an internal node (makes me shudder!) how about doing something like allowing users to somehow provide information on the bucket a node should belong to, a bit like Object.hashCode()? We would probably want to use hashCode() on the Fqn as the primary way of determining which bucket the node goes in, but perhaps a mechanism of allowing the user to add a 'hint' to this would help. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3999854#3999854 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3999854

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: PojoCache uses a special node factory

by manik.surtani＠jboss.com

anonymous wrote : | | This will certainly help. Like you mentioned, this is problem more to the Cache usage itself. But it still will create contention though, and worse still can cause some lock timeout, say, when "/_JBossInternal_/Bucket0-9/Node1" tries to create another sub-node at "/_JBossInternal_/Bucket10-19/Node10", and meanwhile "/_JBossInternal_/Bucket10-19/Node11" tries to create a sub-node at "/_JBossInternal_/Bucket0-9/Node2" within the same transaction. | | This same deadlock can occur without buckets, even if nodes 1, 2, 10 and 11 had the same direct parent. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3999853#3999853 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3999853

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: Channel creation - mux vs. old style

by manik.surtani＠jboss.com

I agree with all of the above. This should be a lot more intelligent in understanding user intention and act accordingly. 1) If JChannelFactory is injected, ONLY attempt to use this or FAIL. 2) If an ObjectName is specified, ONLY attempt to use this or FAIL. 3) If an old-style config is provided, use this or FAIL. 4) ONLY use the default if nothing else is PROVIDED, not if nothing else WORKS. I presume you'd need this in 1.4.x for AS 4.2? :/ View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3999851#3999851 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3999851

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Tests for JBoss MQ message counter functionality

by timfox

http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBMESSAGING-732 View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3999829#3999829 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3999829

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Full JMX functionality

by timfox

For listing subscriptions it returns a list of SubscriptionInfo objects, which are basically value objects holding subscription related data. For listing messages, it currently just returns the actual message objects. I was thinking whether to create value objects for the messages too, but I'm not sure. Currently the caller will have to include the JBM jar on the caller side - not sure how putting in the interface file would help - can you elucidate? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3999826#3999826 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3999826

19 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Serialization] - Re: resolveClass and annotateClass

by Glooper

Thankyou... I will look forward to your findings. Ben View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3999822#3999822 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3999822

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 January 2007