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

[Design of JBoss Transaction Services] - Re: Metadata Support for Transactional Web Services

by bill.burke＠jboss.com

Yes, this stuff is great. If we market it right, should be an interesting value-add for our customers and users. Lol, Mark, cracking the whip....Right, get your damn paper done! View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4071572#4071572 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4071572

18 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Wiki] - Re: Storing wiki data in database

by szimano

That would be really cool. Looking forward. Tomek View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4071489#4071489 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4071489

18 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Wiki] - Re: Storing wiki data in database

by borobaka

I'm going to implement db storage using hibernate & spring. If it would be possible I want to contribute this code to jboss wiki. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4071487#4071487 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4071487

18 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Transaction Services] - Re: Metadata Support for Transactional Web Services

by mark.little＠jboss.com

Sure. Get your dissertation done first :-) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4071483#4071483 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4071483

18 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Redesign extended persistence context

by wolfc

http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/EJBTHREE-1026 I'm working to refactor the extended persistence context to fully allow the SFSBs to have an independent life cycle and fix some bugs with replication of 'nested' SFSBs. What I think will work out is having the XPC behave the same way as a SFSB. For this purpose I've committed a proof of concept (unit test xpcalt). As can be seen the XPCAltBean behaves quit nicely before and after passivation. To allow inheritance of an XPC I've already got an XPCHolder in my workspace (removing the weird injection constructs). And with the decoupled life cycle the weird NestedStatefulBeanContext and ProxiedStatefulBeanContext are a thing of the past. I haven't tried out clustering yet, but with serialization working that should not be an issue. The issue that will pop up is the configuration of an XPC SFSB construct. Flame away. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4071477#4071477 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4071477

18 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Transaction Services] - Re: Metadata Support for Transactional Web Services

by maciej.machulak

"mark.little(a)jboss.com" wrote : | Support for compensation transactions is limited. Plus there are a range of different extended transaction models that we can support in JBossTS that other TMs simply can't. I wouldn't worry about making this portable: making it powerful/more flexible with JBossTS is the way to go. I hope to work on that for future releases. Cheers, Maciej M. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4071460#4071460 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4071460

18 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Transaction Services] - Re: Metadata Support for Transactional Web Services

by maciej.machulak

Hi, "mark.little(a)jboss.com" wrote : | There are no common methods/interfaces. With the exception of JSR 156 none of the compensation transaction API work has ever been standardized. WS-BA is a standard for the on-the-wire protocol (as are other WS-* standards/specifications). It doesn't define an API. Yes, I fully agree. I was only thinking of putting XTS specific code into some sort of a single component but yes - without common interfaces it would not be possible to encapsulate XTS so that it is really easily exchangeable. Cheers, Maciej M. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4071458#4071458 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4071458

18 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - ClassCastException for char[] MetaValue creation

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

This org.jboss.test.metatype.values.factory.test.ArrayValueFactoryUnitTestCase.testCharArray test is failing with the shown CCE. Should simple type arrays be handled by the DefaultMetaValueFactory.createArrayValue? | public void testCharArray() | throws Exception | { | char[] array = "Hello".toCharArray(); | ArrayMetaType arrayType = assertInstanceOf(resolve(array.getClass()), ArrayMetaType.class); | MetaValue[] metaArray = { SimpleValueSupport.wrap('H'), | SimpleValueSupport.wrap('e'), | SimpleValueSupport.wrap('l'), | SimpleValueSupport.wrap('l'), | SimpleValueSupport.wrap('o') | }; | ArrayValueSupport expected = new ArrayValueSupport(arrayType, metaArray); | | MetaValue result = createMetaValue(array); | ArrayValue actual = assertInstanceOf(result, ArrayValue.class); | getLog().debug("Array Value: " + actual); | assertEquals(expected, actual); | } | | java.lang.ClassCastException: [C | at org.jboss.metatype.plugins.values.DefaultMetaValueFactory.createArrayValue(DefaultMetaValueFactory.java:201) | at org.jboss.metatype.plugins.values.DefaultMetaValueFactory.internalCreate(DefaultMetaValueFactory.java:411) | at org.jboss.metatype.plugins.values.DefaultMetaValueFactory.create(DefaultMetaValueFactory.java:344) | at org.jboss.test.metatype.values.factory.test.AbstractMetaValueFactoryTest.createMetaValue(AbstractMetaValueFactoryTest.java:89) | at org.jboss.test.metatype.values.factory.test.ArrayValueFactoryUnitTestCase.testCharArray(ArrayValueFactoryUnitTestCase.java:95) | ... | View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4071441#4071441 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4071441

18 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Transaction Services] - Re: Metadata Support for Transactional Web Services

by mark.little＠jboss.com

"maciej.machulak" wrote : "maciej.machulak" wrote : Hello, | | | | At this moment my code relies on the API provided by XTS. What I thought of is that it might be nice to have some sort of a transaction factory which would provide me with common methods for creating and enlisting participants in Business Activities. It would hide details of the underlying transaction service. I could then encapsulate implementation specific code and make the overall framework easier to extend. | | | | But of course the framework would still rely on XTS. It will be just much easier to replace XTS with some other transaction service - possibly not related to Web Services. | Support for compensation transactions is limited. Plus there are a range of different extended transaction models that we can support in JBossTS that other TMs simply can't. I wouldn't worry about making this portable: making it powerful/more flexible with JBossTS is the way to go. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4071402#4071402 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4071402

18 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Transaction Services] - Re: Metadata Support for Transactional Web Services

by mark.little＠jboss.com

"maciej.machulak" wrote : Hello, | | anonymous wrote : | | anonymous wrote : | | | What I would like to achieve at this moment is to slightly restructure the code and decouple it | | | from the XTS (XML Transaction Service) implementation - by providing some sort of a Transaction | | | Factory. | | | | | | | I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this. | | At this moment my code relies on the API provided by XTS. What I thought of is that it might be nice to have some sort of a transaction factory which would provide me with common methods for creating and enlisting participants in Business Activities. It would hide details of the underlying transaction service. I could then encapsulate implementation specific code and make the overall framework easier to extend. | There are no common methods/interfaces. With the exception of JSR 156 none of the compensation transaction work has ever been standardized. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4071400#4071400 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4071400

18 years, 8 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 August 2007