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

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Commands: Maybe result should be part of the Command-Obj

by camunda

Okay, convinced. If we have a map as result it is not very nice to use. So I will leave the result types as ProcessInstance and so on... The only use case, where this is a big problem is getting the Logs, so I will create a own Command for that (and we need the logs not to often, so this is ok, I think). The good news are: No big change of the already checked in commands :-) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4041362#4041362 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4041362

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: DependencyBuilder chain

by alesj

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | Both and some others :-). | :-) I've re-factored callbacks a bit from initial commit. "adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | Do you know about the JMX integration in | jboss-head/jboss-system-jmx/src/main/org/jboss/system/microcontainer? | No. ;-) 'For an example of a simple facade., see the ServiceControllerContext' - http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=103025 "adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | Ideally, we should be keeping this up-to-date with features in the MC. | Other examples include metadata and aliases. Metadata? Which parts do you have in mind - callbacks, ... ? Ok, will add aliases for start, and see what I can do about callbacks and other stuff you have in mind. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4041361#4041361 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4041361

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: jbossesb-properties.xml filters

by Kevin.Conner＠jboss.com

Daniel, I have just checked in the fix for this issue. Let me know if there are any other problems. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4041360#4041360 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4041360

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: DependencyBuilder chain

by adrian＠jboss.org

"alesj" wrote : "adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | | Which stuff - DependencyBuilder or CallbackItems? | | | | Both and some others :-). | | Do you know about the JMX integration in | jboss-head/jboss-system-jmx/src/main/org/jboss/system/microcontainer? | | Ideally, we should be keeping this up-to-date with features in the MC. | Other examples include metadata and aliases. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4041358#4041358 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4041358

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: jbossesb-properties.xml filters

by Kevin.Conner＠jboss.com

I have created a JIRA issue to track this. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4041354#4041354 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4041354

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: DependencyBuilder chain

by alesj

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : You need to speak to Kabir. | So Kabir :-), what do you think? "adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | I will eventually get around to looking at/fixing this stuff to how I think it should work. | e.g. A lot of this stuff should apply to JMX as well (although I don't think we can | really integrate AOP with JMX without changing the JBossMX interceptor model?). Which stuff - DependencyBuilder or CallbackItems? Callbacks only depend on the 2 new interfaces we introduced - InvokeDispatchContext and AttributeDispatchContext - so they are not POJO specific. Maybe only getting the dependant class is more of a problem for MBeans. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4041353#4041353 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4041353

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: New ClassLoader initial checkin

by adrian＠jboss.org

ClassLoaderManager This is a replacement/port of LoadMgr3. I originally tried to rewrite this as something intelligble but couldn't get it to work. So I just copied it and simplified it, e.g. only the Domain deals with the ClassLoadingTasks now and the ClassLoaderManger doesn't deal with domains it deals with [Class]Loaders. After I did this it still didn't work :-) It was only when I implemented timeouts on the two most important waits | boolean interrupted = thread.interrupted(); | | int waits = 0; | | try | { | while (true) | { | try | { | if (lock.tryLock(0, TimeUnit.MICROSECONDS) == false) | { | // REVIEW: If we've been spinning for more than a minute then there is probably something wrong? | if (waits++ == 6) | throw new IllegalStateException("Waiting too long to get the classloader lock: " + this); | // Wait 10 seconds | if (trace) | log.trace(this + " waiting for lock " + thread); | this.wait(10000); | } | else | { | if (trace) | log.trace(this + " aquiredLock " + thread + " holding=" + lock.getHoldCount()); | break; | } | } | catch (InterruptedException ignored) | { | } | } | } | finally | { | if (interrupted) | thread.interrupt(); | } | that I figured out what was going on. It started working with the timeouts, but only after a 10 second pause (co-incidence? :-) A missed notification perhaps? The answer was there is something subtle in the way the ClassLoaderManager and the ClassLoader hand off control to each other. Normally you release locks in the reverse order you aquire them. Not here. Once I modified the lock release and notifyAll() to match the old LoadMgr3 code it started working. :-) Very Voodoo! View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4041351#4041351 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4041351

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: New ClassLoader initial checkin

by adrian＠jboss.org

Back on topic. So what is missing? 1) Policy This ClassLoader is very dumb. It relies on you to tell it what the policy is. The only current implementation of a policy is in the tests https://svn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/projects/microcontainer/trunk/classlo... There are actually two more levels that need to be implemented. a) VFS layer - write a policy that uses the VFS b) Dependency and policy construction controller - i.e. from metadata workout when dependencies are satisifed and create the relevant policies. This will actually be part of the [Main]Deployer(s) when I plugin the MC to it. 2) Security The current tests don't run with a security manager enabled, but also I need to audit the classloader for two things: a) Where privileged blocks are needed b) What permissions we need to define, e.g. who can register policies or create domains 3) Caching/BlackListing There is currenty no caching or black listing (cache misses). This is going to be a little more complicated to implement since you can't use a global cache for OSGi. It is no longer the "big ball mud" model. The type and whether to cache should be part of the Policy. 4) Translater I added a hook for translating classes, but I'm probably going to remove it since this is already handled from Java5+ by the agents api in the JDK. 5) TODOs There are a number of other TODOs and REVIEWs in the code, but these are fairly minor. 6) Tests I have some basic tests and I've ported some of the old classloader tests from the jboss testsuite (where they didn't try to hook into the UCL). Obviously more are needed. e.g. I have no tests at all for the domain hierarchy. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4041349#4041349 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4041349

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: New ClassLoader initial checkin

by alesj

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | No. API/SPI is always allowed to reference plugins. | But this means that you cannot change the 'plugins' implementation on top of spi? So spi is here meant as a central point of code - abstraction from the impl details - not meant to be 'changed'? "adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | Otherwise factories wouldn't be able to define a default implementation for example. | Reflection? :-) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4041348#4041348 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4041348

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: New ClassLoader initial checkin

by adrian＠jboss.org

NOTE: This thread is informational. Please create a new thread for individual topics. I don't want another 20-30 post discussion on different/unrelated topics. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4041346#4041346 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4041346

17 years, 5 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 April 2007