In terms of Bootstraps getting access to the KernelDeployments, I have done this in a less invasive change where the Bootstrap interface remains the same, but there is now a MCServer spi that extends Server to provide access to the Kernel and KernelDeployments:
| public interface MCServer extends Server
| {
| public Kernel getKernel();
| public Map<String, KernelDeployment> getDeployments();
| }
|
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4187706#4187706
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4187706
Hi,
You guys correctly point to the source of the problem which is a group that could not be flushed during getState call. I first thought that is a transient problem, however I was confused when I saw that you are not using FLUSH in your stack, are you?
Anyway, the root cause is that the cluster could not be flushed for whatever underlying reason that might have happened and therefore the state retrieval did not proceed. You have the following options:
a) keep things as they are - catch the exception on getState. The state will not be transferred to a joining node
b) use another getState method where a parameter useFlushIfPresent is set to false. Cluster will not be flushed for state transfer in that case.
I am not familiar with message ordering and state semantics that have to be satisfied in JMS. Are you familiar with FLUSH? There is a good summary here [1]. You might not need to flush the cluster during state transfer. Let us know.
Regards,
Vladimir
[1] http://www.theserverside.com/tt/articles/article.tss?l=NewFeaturesJGroups
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4187705#4187705
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4187705
"timfox" wrote : "clebert.suconic(a)jboss.com" wrote : Begin brain storm...
| |
| | In my experience, when you break JARs you need to ensure the dependencies are aways one way.
|
| Yes, the dependencies are all one way.
|
| jbm-core depends on nothing
| everything depends on jbm-core
My point was, we need to ensure the dependencies are not broken. I mean.. we need to find eventual mistakes through compilation ant tasks.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4187700#4187700
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4187700
Below is the copy paste from ThreadLocalAssociation.java:
//This removes a custom callback security handler that might have
| //been set if using UsernameTokenProfile with digest; doing this
| //here won't be required anymore once our custom security manager
| //will be used in our wsse implementation.
| CallbackHandlerPolicyContextHandler.setCallbackHandler(null);
|
Is this ugly hack still necessary Alessio?
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4187671#4187671
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4187671
The tck started complaining about the moved classes:
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: org/jboss/system/server/Server
at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass1(Native Method)
at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass(ClassLoader.java:620)
at java.security.SecureClassLoader.defineClass(SecureClassLoader.java:124)
at java.net.URLClassLoader.defineClass(URLClassLoader.java:260)
at java.net.URLClassLoader.access$100(URLClassLoader.java:56)
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4187665#4187665
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4187665
"ALRubinger" wrote : Regarding "moving 'bootstrap'" from AS, I'll probably copy it to the new location, then we can decide whether to use the old module or new component. Then we can use it in EJB3 sooner, and AS can decide when it wants to make the switch (using a patch I'll supply).
|
That's much safer, I agree.
Oh, and to hijack the thread a bit, aren't we done with jboss-aspect changes? ;)
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4187648#4187648
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4187648