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

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Work on 187, 188, 218, .bsh, StructureDeployer

by alesj

"alesj" wrote : | What I would like to do, is to test that a single deploy|undeploy and (add|remove)+process don't corrupt each other in multithread requests. | Another test would include a shutdown thread, from where on all other non-shutdown (deploy|undeploy) threads should fail. | The question is how to gather required information, meaning that a thread was legally allowed to go (or not go) past the locks that we've put? | Done. The first test - DeployerSingleDeploymentTestCase.testMultiThreads - is more a proof of concept through design, unleashing multiple threads just additionally confirms assumptions that deploy/undeploy and (add|remove)+process don't interfere with each other. :-) The second one - DeployerSingleDeploymentTestCase.testMultiThreadsAndShutdown - is better. :-) I'm checking if certain DeployerClient method invocation got past the read lock, as such not being valid to fail due to shutdown. All others that didn't get past the read lock must fail. Perhaps only the way how I'm checking if thread got past the lock is a bit too impl detail - intercepting Deployment.getName method invocation. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4106680#4106680 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4106680

18 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - EJB 2.1 view with only a home

by wolfc

Where does it say that: @Stateless | @RemoteHome(MyStateless21Home.class) | public class MyStatelessBean | { | ... | } does not constitute an EJB 2.1 view? (Assuming the correct interfaces are there as well.) Or where does it say that: @Remote(MyStateless21Remote.class) is valid? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4106662#4106662 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4106662

18 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Getting content of XML element

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

18 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Annotation to metadata status

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

Note that I changed the InterceptorBindingsMetaData from a map to a list because the ejb-name although required, is not unique. I removed the bean specific accessors as well. It did not seem as though were in use by the ejb3 codebase, but if they are the next snapshot update will require some changes. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4106631#4106631 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4106631

18 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Annotation to metadata status

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

"wolfc" wrote : Bugrit, I forgot to commit the MyStateless21Bean fix. | | MyStatefulBean is not according to spec. It declares an EJB 2.1 remote home with an EBJ 3 remote business interface, but no EJB 2.1 remote interface. (EJB 3 4.6.1 bullet 2 & 3) So unless we're doing a negative test, this should be cleaned up. | Ok, I see. This requires validation of the @Remote target class. Is this something we need to be adding to the processor? "wolfc" wrote : | I've added the ability to load a sub-package to AnnotationEjb3UnitTestCase. | I can move this to the common test package and allow for the following: | @ScanPackage("org.jboss.test.metadata.ejb3.annotation.multiview") | | public void testMultiview() { | | Collection<Class<?>> classes = PackageScanner.loadClasses(); | | ... | | } | Looks good. | View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4106629#4106629 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4106629

18 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Annotation to metadata status

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

The interceptor annotation processors have been added. Can you check the InterceptorsProcessor logic. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4106627#4106627 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4106627

18 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Annotation to metadata status

by wolfc

Bugrit, I forgot to commit the MyStateless21Bean fix. MyStatefulBean is not according to spec. It declares an EJB 2.1 remote home with an EBJ 3 remote business interface, but no EJB 2.1 remote interface. (EJB 3 4.6.1 bullet 2 & 3) So unless we're doing a negative test, this should be cleaned up. I've added the ability to load a sub-package to AnnotationEjb3UnitTestCase. I can move this to the common test package and allow for the following: @ScanPackage("org.jboss.test.metadata.ejb3.annotation.multiview") | public void testMultiview() { | Collection<Class<?>> classes = PackageScanner.loadClasses(); | ... | } View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4106616#4106616 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4106616

18 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Bean declarations only in jboss.xml

by wolfc

It should already be there. Because if it's an EJB3 descriptor merge will be called with mustOverride = false. (JBossMetaData#705@67155) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4106614#4106614 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4106614

18 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Profiler] - Re: set up profiler LD_LIBRARY_PATH

by Huijuan Shao

You need to set up this variable LD_LIBRARY_PATH. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4106613#4106613 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4106613

18 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Bean declarations only in jboss.xml

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

The annotation should be producing a spec metadata entry, so currently this is a problem with not having the annotation processing integrated yet. Should be soon. However, since we have expanded the jboss.xml to essentially make the ejb-jar.xml unnecessary, we should be allowing for jboss.xml only entries. Your change should be made. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4106584#4106584 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4106584

18 years, 4 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 November 2007