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

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: MDR doesn't work on annotated privates

by adrian＠jboss.org

If you change your build to use the latest jboss mdr snapshot, you can try this out. You have a choice of new DeclaredMethodSignature(Method) or new DeclaredMethodSignature(declaringClassName, methodName, parameters); I'll leave JBMDR-35 open for now, since such hacks always lead to other hacks. :-) In principle (there's no reason why it should work) you can programmatically add INSTANCE metadata against this signature (e.g. xml overrides), but I haven't tried/tested it. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4170399#4170399 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4170399

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: ProfileService equiv to ServiceBindingManager

by bstansberry＠jboss.com

Correct. From a few posts back: "bstansberry(a)jboss.com" wrote : "bstansberry(a)jboss.com" wrote : A question is what to do with the old org.jboss.system.ServiceBinding interface and it's usage in ServiceConfigurator (and OldServiceConfigurator): | | | | ..... | | | | No comments, so I'm going to get rid of this stuff now. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4170397#4170397 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4170397

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: MDR doesn't work on annotated privates

by adrian＠jboss.org

After thinking about it for a bit, I think the best thing to do is to go with a simple implementation of a new DeclaredMethodSignature since that has a minimal impact. This won't be integrated with the MethodSignature stuff. If it turns out in future that integration is required, we can modify the MethodSignature to support it and rework the DeclaredMethodSignature to be based on it. That way that calling code doesn't wouldn't need to change. Although we'd probably deprecate DeclaredMethodSignature if that was the case, (i.e. if MethodSignature gained an optional declaring class parameter) and remove it in JBossMDR 3.0? https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBMDR-35 View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4170392#4170392 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4170392

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: ProfileService equiv to ServiceBindingManager

by anuman36

Just grabbed the trunk and built. Is it safe to say that the old MX based ServiceBinding used in AS 4 does not work in AS 5.0? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4170390#4170390 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4170390

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: JBM and AS' ServiceBindingManager

by bstansberry＠jboss.com

Yes, the "hacky" thing about the system property approach is it doesn't create an explicit dependency on the SBM. The value-factory approach does. But, I think that's OK, at least for AS 5.0.0. Currently, ServiceBindingManager is deployed in conf/, so for sure it will be deployed before JBM. Further, the Naming service depends on SBM, so SBM will always deploy before Naming. It's possible Naming could someday move to deploy, in which case SBM likely would as well [1]. If that occurred, we'd have to be sure jboss.messaging:service=Connector,transport=bisocket deploys after Naming. That should be doable, since the connector only exists to satisfy the connection factories, and those have an (undeclared) dependency on Naming. But I think we can cross that bridge when we come to it, as any move of Naming would have all sorts of implications; this would just be one. [1] http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4169051#4169051 View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4170382#4170382 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4170382

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Dependencies to JBoss5 core components...

by clebert.suconic＠jboss.com

I aways assumed JNDI and Transactions as part of the core-services of the application server, in such way you don't really need to explicitly declare a dependency on those services. I just learned that Transactions has moved to the /deploy area on JBoss5, what means if your service uses transactions, you need to explicit declare the dependency. is that the right decision? Shouldn't everybody depend on the TransactionManager explicitly? This would be the same as requiring services to depend on JNDI. A bit silly IMHO. What guarantees we have the TransactionManager will aways load before JBoss Messaging (or the ServerPeer) if we don't have the declared dependency? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4170379#4170379 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4170379

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: JBM and AS' ServiceBindingManager

by clebert.suconic＠jboss.com

I like the idea of getting rid of the sausage-like Binding-Manager XML. I don't think it is hacky at all... Instead of replacing the configs into two places, we keep it in only one place, defining properties... and that's it. The only thing is to guarantee the Binding Manager aways comes up first, as it needs to define the properties for everybody (as you won't have an explicit property dependency between the MBeans). BindingManager => it should be a dependency for everybody when in place. That's a requirement IMO. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4170373#4170373 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4170373

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: cache statistics via JMX

by mircea.markus

anonymous wrote : Not sure whether this is already included in CacheMngmtInterceptor, but what about read/write percentages? not exposed yet, good point anonymous wrote : What about physical size of cache/regions? (I had someone asking this a short while back) +1 we need to implement https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBCACHE-11 before being able to expose that one View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4170372#4170372 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4170372

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: JBM and AS' ServiceBindingManager

by bstansberry＠jboss.com

Any comments? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4170371#4170371 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4170371

17 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: Eviction redesign

by mircea.markus

anonymous wrote : Perhaps a different name for "EvictionPolicy", maybe "EvictionActionPolicy" or something. Using the same term for a different thing will be confusing. I think that the Policy and Algorithm are a not very meaningful terms for describing the responsibility of these classes; also the terms overlap. What about some other names? anonymous wrote : EvictionAlgorithm - how are nodes selected for eviction EvictionOrderingPolicy anonymous wrote : EvictionPolicy - what happens when nodes are evicted +1 for EvictionActionPolicy View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4170369#4170369 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4170369

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