April 2008 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[Design of JCA on JBoss] - Re: JBPAPP-750 - Integration between AS and JBossMessaging 1

by adrian＠jboss.org

"timfox" wrote : What shouldn't happen is the system silently fails in subtle ways, as it does now. | | Inferring whether the user wants to use XA on the basis of whether the CF implements the XA CF interfaces is not valid - there's nothing in the spec that says the the same class can't implement both the XA and non XA interfaces. | Like I said above. There's no way for the resource adapter to know that the administrator configured a local connection manager. So there's no way for us avoid the subtle failures when things get misconfigured. ASIDE Well actually there is, you can try to make the **guess** based on whether getXAResource()/getLocalTransaction() or nothing was invoked, but you'd have to jump through a lot of hoops to delay initializing the connection for as a long as possible so you can decide which api to use based on that call. END-ASIDE I don't consider a "workaround" a real use case. We could add all sorts of config options to enable users to workaround potential bugs in other peoples code. But the YAGNI princple applies. i.e. We'll do it when we really have to, e.g. all the Oracle jdbc driver workarouds we have. Otherwise lets not over complicate the configuration with useless options which only means the users can't see the wood for the trees. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4142865#4142865 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4142865

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Build System] - Re: New repository locations

by pgier

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : "pgier" wrote : | | The second one is a place for stuff that we copy from central. This one will hopefully be temporary until we can set up our own mirror so that we don't need to copy these dependencies all the time. | | | | Do we really want to create a mirror? Won't that just be the same as using the | external maven repository directly? | | i.e. when it breaks the mirroring will also cause our copy to break The idea would be that we would be tracking the changes. Maybe using svn so that if something breaks we can fix it. Maybe just a repository manager would work for us. That will automatically save dependencies downloaded from central. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4142858#4142858 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4142858

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: Design of JBCACHE-1316

by galder.zamarreno＠jboss.com

"manik.surtani(a)jboss.com" wrote : In 1.4.X, shouldn't the bounded buffer also be initialised with something a bit bigger than the default 1024? | Actually, looking at this again. You had already changed the capacity of the recycle queue to 20000 rather than the default 1024 somewhere in between 1.4.0.SP1 and 1.4.1.SP3, so we're fine there. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4142852#4142852 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4142852

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JCA on JBoss] - Re: JBPAPP-750 - Integration between AS and JBossMessaging 1

by timfox

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | Only if TestJMSLocalProvider points at a plain ConnectionFactory, i.e. | one that doesn't implement XAConnectionFactory. | | If the jms provider implements XA then don't use a local connection manager | to manage transactions. You end up with the weaker Last Resource Gambit | (i.e. the transaction observer pattern rather than the transaction participant pattern). | | But I'm just repeating what I've already said. | | I want a real use case not trying to support some broken/stupid configuration. IMO if the user wants to configure the connection manager for local only, then that's what should happen. The user may have reasons for doing this, like they specifically don't want to use XA, e.g. if there is a known bug in the provider's XA implementation and they need to roll back to local tx as a workaround. So I won't necessarily consider this to be broken configuration. What shouldn't happen is the system silently fails in subtle ways, as it does now. Inferring whether the user wants to use XA on the basis of whether the CF implements the XA CF interfaces is not valid - there's nothing in the spec that says the the same class can't implement both the XA and non XA interfaces. *** Tim dons hard hat in preparation for brocking View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4142850#4142850 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4142850

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Build System] - Re: New repository locations

by adrian＠jboss.org

"pgier" wrote : | The second one is a place for stuff that we copy from central. This one will hopefully be temporary until we can set up our own mirror so that we don't need to copy these dependencies all the time. | Do we really want to create a mirror? Won't that just be the same as using the external maven repository directly? i.e. when it breaks the mirroring will also cause our copy to break View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4142844#4142844 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4142844

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: Web Service Transactions Implementation: Configuring WS

by mark.little＠jboss.com

And the answer is that my network connection died ;-) WS-A talks in terms of EPRs with extensible header information and ReferenceProperties (WS-A 2004) and ReferenceParameters. Only the latter two (or one, depending on your version) are meant to be opaque to the consumer and used only by the EPR minter. The EPR isn't opaque though. Like all WS-* specifications and standards, we didn't say anything about language bindings: we are implementation language agnostic. However, I do find it strange that information like To, RelatesTo and MessageId aren't available through the Java API. I don't recall that being part of JSR 261 (before it died), so maybe this is something that is under specified in JAX-WS? But the conclusion is: it's not a problem with WS-A :-) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4142843#4142843 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4142843

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Build System] - Re: Move dependency management back into app server svn stru

by bstansberry＠jboss.com

Silence is golden. A .project file has been added. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4142841#4142841 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4142841

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of AOP on JBoss (Aspects/JBoss)] - Re: verbose logging when Log4jLoggerPlugin not present

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

Don't set -Djboss.aop.verbose=true If this is not the case, let me know and I will take a look View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4142837#4142837 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4142837

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Remoting, Unified Invokers] - Re: Checking in Eclipse project files into Remoting 3 reposi

by david.lloyd＠jboss.com

I'd rather have those couple days spent working towards the M2 release :) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4142830#4142830 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4142830

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Remoting, Unified Invokers] - Re: Checking in Eclipse project files into Remoting 3 reposi

by trustin

In Maven 2, there's only one artifact for one module. Actually having an artifact assembled from more than one module causes some complication in dependency reolution. For example, let's assume that module A produces artifact A, module B produces artifact B and artifact C is assembled from the artifact A and B. In this case, if project X depends on artifact C, project Y depends on artifact A and project Z depends on artifact X and Y, there's no easy way for Maven to figure out artifact C includes artifact A. If project X depended on artifact A & B, dependency resolution will be easier. (Uh... poor English, eh? ;) I was obnoxious about this restriction at the first time Maven 2 was released, but I found it is pretty good restriction that reduces the confusion about the relationship between artifacts and modules. Anyway, it doesn't mean that you cannot create an artifact of artifacts (e.g. artifact C) with Maven assembly plugin, which is often used to generate a tarball distribution and all-in-one JAR. I believe I can mavenize Remoting 3 within a couple days. Then you can simply type 'mvn package' to build all artifacts and the build shouldn't break at all, hopefully not slowing us down very much. WDYT? ;) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4142827#4142827 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4142827

18 years

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 April 2008