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

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Message redistribution in JBM 2.0 - request for feedback

by jhowell＠redhat.com

I believed in that so strongly I said it twice. :) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4171302#4171302 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4171302

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Message redistribution in JBM 2.0 - request for feedback

by jhowell＠redhat.com

So I guess I would only vote to get rid of message distribution if we got rid of the notion of partial queues(I guess that would force us to move to the IBM MQ model) . If we're not going to visit that question, I think we're stuck with message redistribution. Jay:) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4171301#4171301 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4171301

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Message redistribution in JBM 2.0 - request for feedback

by jhowell＠redhat.com

So I guess I would only vote to get rid of message distribution if we got rid of the notion of partial queues(I guess that would force us to move to the IBM MQ model) . If we're not going to visit that question, I think we're stuck with message redistribution. Jay:) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4171300#4171300 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4171300

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Message redistribution in JBM 2.0 - request for feedback

by jhowell＠redhat.com

I would vote to abandon it too, but doesn't it go hand in hand with partial queues? The whole idea of a partial queue is that all the partial queues together represent the whole. The message distribution is the method to simulate the entire queue. If you have a partial queue and there is no way to get to the messages in another partial queue, is it really a partial queue or just a stand alone queue that supports failover. So getting rid of message distribution breaks the whole, doesn't it. I think the whole idea of message distribution and partial queues goes hand in hand. If you get rid of one, you really have to get rid of the other don't you? I think this is why this topic got off subject early on, because intuitively have partial queues and message distribution between nodes linked. If we are going to support the connection round robin aspect of the clustered connection factory, we have to keep the message distribution. I mean it's possible that a producer could make 3 connections to nodes 1, 2, and 4. Now the client is completley unaware which servers in the cluster it's connected to(and it should be). Now a consumer uses the clustered connection factory and gets 3, 4, 5 as it's connections. If we don't have redistribution of messages, messages on 1 and 2 will be stranded wont they. Sorry if I'm being a little dense but....Partial queues and message distribution seem to be linked... So if we still have partial queues, I'd say that we can't really get rid of message distribution. Message distribution is what stitches the partials together to simulate the total queue, while allowing for performance driven locks and acks on a clustered node. Jay:) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4171298#4171298 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4171298

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Build failed message

by clebert.suconic＠jboss.com

I assumed that a failure on the unit testsuite is a mandatory clause for commit so a failure would abort anything and would be considered a build failure, While a failure on the other testsuites would be considered just a testsuite failure. Notice that the other testsuites (stress, integration... etc) are not being executed on all-tests if there is a testsuite failure. But we could change that. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4171295#4171295 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4171295

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Using AnnotationEnvironment in Seam

by pete.muir＠jboss.org

FYI, my plan for how to integrate this with Seam is: * to make the deployment handlers expose metadata about the resource (file or class) they want to handle - an annotation on the class - a filename suffix they want to match against - whether the metadata is complete * If any handler declares the metadata incomplete, then we must switch back to normal scanning. All handlers built into Seam will be metadata complete. * If we are using AnnotationEnv (and equivalent for other resources), then we simply use the metadata the handler exposes to request the Set of files. "alesj" wrote : Where I don't see what exactly does "classLoader.getResources(filename).hasMoreElements() " do/help. Checks to see if a .component.xml exists for this class. If it does, then the component installation is decided later, when that file is read. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4171293#4171293 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4171293

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Using AnnotationEnvironment in Seam

by pete.muir＠jboss.org

"alesj" wrote : Basically you're saying you scan the whole classpath, | but only do real lookup from the root of those deployments/classpath entries | that have some Seam specific resource present? Yes, we do this to limit the scanning (which in this case isn't relevant), but we need to preserve the behaviour I think. anonymous wrote : The AnnEnv handles this already since it does lookup at the classloading layer, we could perhaps exclude deployments that don't contain any Seam specific resource before we actually do some reading from AnnEnv. Sounds good. "alesj" wrote : "pete.muir(a)jboss.org" wrote : so can we get this metadata (files, based on their filename) from the MC? | | We could add this in a similar way we do annotation scanning - as ResourceVisitor on Module. Or we could visit deployment's root, excluding deployment's metadata locations. The result should be then put as attachment to deployment unit's attachments. Let me know what exactly you need, and I'll try to put the code into seam-int/microcontainer module. Currently, I need a way to get all files that end with a suffix (like ".page.xml" or ".jpdl.xml") that exist in archives which are marked to be scanned by Seam (as discussed above). "alesj" wrote : "pete.muir(a)jboss.org" wrote : | | 3) For the future, can we add support for metaannotations support? This will make it supereasy to use for WB. | | | | | You mean this: | | | @DeploymentType | | public @interface SomeType {} | | | | @SomeType | | public class MyTypeImpl {} | | | Where you would like to get MyTypeImpl class? | | Should be easy to add. | I'll have a look. Exactly. "alesj" wrote : "pete.muir(a)jboss.org" wrote : | | 4) How does it handle exceptions loading classes? Throw them for us to catch? | | | AnnEnv doesn't load classes. ;-) | But it will throw RuntimeException when you ask for it and it fails. | Annotation scanning deployer by default doesn't fail if it has some problems | reading the annotations. But this is configurable. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4171288#4171288 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4171288

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Deployment Framework] - Persistence unit deployers are not invoked for WEB-INF/lib j

by wolfc

A persistence unit can be packaged in a jar in WEB-INF/lib (JPA 6.2). Right now the persistence unit deployers are not invoked when this is the case. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4171281#4171281 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4171281

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Dependencies from scoped to global

by alesj

"kabir.khan(a)jboss.com" wrote : Who populates DependencyInfo.dependsOnMe? I would assume it happens when describing the side who has the dependency? i.e. the scoped bean who has a dependency on the global one? If that is correct, could/should not the controller be known for the dependencies? Yes, it's the dependency item when it gets resolved. We could hold the ref to controller but we don't. It should be some other better way to resolve this. Keeping DependencyItem simple as possible, only holding the minimum info needed - name, dependOn, when required, state. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4171280#4171280 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4171280

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss IIOP on JBoss] - Jboss with a Corba firewall

by fatma

Hi, I am using the firewall Lorica and I interface it with my jboss4.0.2 in order to control the access from the GUI to the jboss server. The firewall Lorica offers a CORBA service which is capable of tunneling CORBA communications through a predefined network port. I would like to verify if Jboss can be interfaced with a corba firewall, If so, which configuration should I set to ensure the communication between them. Thanks a lot for any suggestion. Best regards. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4171279#4171279 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4171279

17 years, 7 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 2008