September 2007 - jboss-dev-forums

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Feature Request - global lists API

by kukeltje

it is not realy unusual. to generic lists are dangerous (performance wise) and filtering walking through the objects is relatively slow etc... jbpm is extensible (databmodel is open) and writing custom/proprietary queries is *not* bad practice. That is one of the reasons these global lists have not been requested by others (therefor not 'unusual') For troubleshooting, try the hibernate plugin in eclipse. You can query the database easily. You can file a jira issue for this and see if it is accepted or not. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4080657#4080657 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4080657

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Feature Request - global lists API

by simonbaker

It seems unusual that jBPM API has methods to get lists of TaskInstances by actor / groups, but no global (complete) list. It makes it difficult to get a complete list for doing your own filtering. This applies to other objects as well. If we look at these objects as comprising a collection, it is natural to expect to find an iterator over the collection. Such global lists are useful for monitoring, troubleshooting, and many production cases, such as implementing a special user role who can work on anyone's tasks for any workflow, or filtering a task list by an arbitrary group of users. It seems like it would not be hard to implement in many cases, such as for TaskInstance. Can this feature be considered for an upcoming release? The main objects of interest would be TaskInstances and ProcessInstances. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4080643#4080643 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4080643

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of AOP on JBoss (Aspects/JBoss)] - Re: AOP asintegration WITHOUT the integration :-)

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

I've now had a look at the new aop classloading tests, and see the problem you have been describing. So, the problem we have with the failing test is that it is trying to create the interceptor twice. This is what we solved before with the ScopedJBossClassPool/ScopedClassLoaderDomain. To summarize what you have probably said already with my own words, with the new classloaders, we don't really have scoped classloaders in this case. So the check to see if the classloader is scoped to create a new domain does not really work here... I see what you have done, which is basically to make sure that the correct classloader is used, however we are not really limiting what is available. What is needed is maybe ***something along the lines of*** setting the classloader on the advicebindings (and other things) + a AdviceBinding.isVisble(ClassLoader) type method or something like that. I'll look more into this in the morning and hopefully come up with some better ideas :-) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4080639#4080639 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4080639

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of AOP on JBoss (Aspects/JBoss)] - Re: AOP asintegration WITHOUT the integration :-)

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

That certainly clears things up :-) In ComplexImportAdviceUnitTestCase, could you please explain the purpose of the | MockClassLoaderPolicy supportPolicy = MockClassLoaderHelper.createMockClassLoaderPolicy("Support"); | supportPolicy.setPathsAndPackageNames(PACKAGE_SUPPORT); | ClassLoader support = createClassLoader(supportPolicy); | try | { | MockClassLoaderPolicy bPolicy = MockClassLoaderHelper.createMockClassLoaderPolicy("B"); | bPolicy.setPathsAndPackageNames(PACKAGE_B); | bPolicy.setDelegates(createDelegates(supportPolicy)); | ClassLoader b = createClassLoader(bPolicy); | I am thinking of the following line: bPolicy.setDelegates(createDelegates(supportPolicy)); | View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4080578#4080578 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4080578

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - directory/package structure

by camunda

For simulation Tom and me created this base directory in jbpm 3 HEAD: jpdl/simulation/src I will now add the following directories: - test/java (we created that together) - main/java - tutorial/java - tutorial/jpdl This is the way it should be, right? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4080566#4080566 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4080566

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: JBCACHE-1154 - Introduce ability to mark nodes as reside

by mircea.markus

anonymous wrote : and reduces node memory size (no need to add new boolean variables) - an boolean is hold on a bit. An RegularEnumSet aggregates an long (64 bit) + some caching arrays (other bits as well). From a memory POV it is optimal to aggregate booleans directly (than EnumSets wrapping enums). anonymous wrote : Reduces future changes of the Node interface (no need to add methods for a new feature) - code would be less readable; also I don't think this is an proper enum usage: i.e. define bounded types(the boolean variables are not logically related) -> enhance readability View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4080542#4080542 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4080542

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: MC meets Drools - new Reliance module

by alesj

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : Why don't you call the project dependency-rules? | Then later you can have a dependency-jbpm or dependency-xxxx Hmm, I like your idea, perhaps only the name dependency is not quite right, since it's not a clear extension of the dependency module - like your deployers, where every deployers-sub-module is extension of previous. In my case I have mixture of all MC modules - dependency, kernel, aop, deployers, ... Is reliance-rules, reliance-xxxx, ... still ok? Currently I'll split them into three things I have done: (a) reliance-identity (b) reliance-rules (depends on (a)) (c) reliance-jbpm (wip) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4080512#4080512 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4080512

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Transaction Services] - Exception Handling Difference between JBoss 3.2.6 and Jboss4

by Anandnatraj

Do we have any difference in the way the Transaction - Exceptions are handled with Jboss3.2.6 and JBoss4.0.5GA? I have one scenario where from the Program I am throwing the SystemException Manually but the exception message thrown seems to be different.. Scenario: 1. Complete Step 1 (WIth one transaction) Status: data are changed in accordance with Step1 usecase 2. Complete Step2 (With new transaction). We are throwing System Exception manually. In jboss-3.2.6 ========== Step1 started with new transaction and process gets committed since no system exception is thrown. Step2 started with new transaction but gets rolled back since System Exception thrown and also further execution stops. This behavior is as expected In jboss-4.0.5.GA ============= Step 1started with new transaction and process gets committed since no system exception is thrown. In Sample Prep Conversion Call type while getting rollback because of system exception ?java.lang.IllegalStateException: setRollbackOnly() not allowed without a transaction? is thrown. Seems the transaction is not created. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4080471#4080471 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4080471

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: MC meets Drools - new Reliance module

by adrian＠jboss.org

Why don't you call the project dependency-rules? Then later you can have a dependency-jbpm or dependency-xxxx View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4080432#4080432 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4080432

17 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Maven depency issues

by adrian＠jboss.org

"pgier" wrote : | The easiest way that I know of to find these conflicting dependencies is by using the dependencies project info report | | mvn project-info-reports:dependencies | It's a pita to go through all the modules and find instances of these conflicts, but someone (maybe me) should go through the mc modules and fix them. | | Another command that can help clean up dependencies is this one: | | mvn dependency:analyze | The report will tell you if you have unused dependencies listed, or if you are directly dependent on one of your transitive dependencies. When I have time, I plan to add a feature to this plugin that will tell you if you are including two versions of the same artifact. | These tools should be used before any release anyway. We need to make sure we are not transitively depending on snapshots or things we don't want to depend on. e.g. maybe dependning on alpha/beta version of a project when we do a final release. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4080424#4080424 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4080424

17 years, 2 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 September 2007