January 2009 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[Design of JBoss Labs] - Re: JBoss Community Leaders polls not working

by maeste

I've just got another vote. Now voters are 40 and I'm at 40%. Of course I have a screenshot of that too, since wiki updates seems still frozen and so it will be probably lost in next hours. Have you any news about? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4205610#4205610 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4205610

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Deployment cleanup & modifications

by alesj

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | The programmers that write VFS code shouldn't have to be aware of the caching | and code in a different way to get it. It should be configurable in an "aspectized" way. This is done in the latest VFS release. I deprecated the VFS::getCachedFile api. It's just missing more detailed cache type. e.g. your VFSCacheInfo for temp handling View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4205607#4205607 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4205607

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Cache configurations for EJB3 stateful beans

by jaikiran

While updating the reference docs for EJB3, i found this information for JBossAS-4.x related to Stateful bean caching: anonymous wrote : | Stateful beans are stored in a cache. This cache is responsible for passivated stateful sessions when the cache becomes too full or a bean is too old. You may want to set things like the max size of this cache, and when beans should become idle. Configuration is different depending on whether you are clustered or not. | | Non-Clustered: | For non clustered stateful beans, the @org.jboss.annotation.ejb.cache.simple.CacheConfig annotation is | responsible for configuring the cache. | Clustered: | | For non clustered stateful beans, the @org.jboss.annotation.ejb.cache.tree.CacheConfig annotation is | responsible for configuring the cache. | No Passivation: | | Sometimes it is useful to turn off passivation entirely. This can be done by plugging in the caching implementation using the @org.jboss.annotation.ejb.cache.Cache (org.jboss.ejb3.cache.NoPassivationCache.class) annotation. The annotations have been now moved to a different location. And based on what i see in the definition of org.jboss.ejb3.annotation.CacheConfig: | @Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME) | @Target( | {ElementType.TYPE}) | public @interface CacheConfig { | | // Class Members | | public static final String DEFAULT_CLUSTERED_OBJECT_NAME = "jboss.cache:service=EJB3SFSBClusteredCache"; | | public static final int DEFAULT_NONCLUSTERED_MAX_SIZE = 100000; | | public static final int DEFAULT_CLUSTERED_MAX_SIZE = 10000; | | public static final long DEFAULT_IDLE_TIMEOUT_SECONDS = 300; | | public static final long DEFAULT_REMOVAL_TIMEOUT_SECONDS = 0; | | public static final boolean DEFAULT_REPL_IS_PASV = true; | | // Instance Members | | String name() default ""; | | int maxSize() default CacheConfig.DEFAULT_NONCLUSTERED_MAX_SIZE; | | long idleTimeoutSeconds() default CacheConfig.DEFAULT_IDLE_TIMEOUT_SECONDS; | | boolean replicationIsPassivation() default CacheConfig.DEFAULT_REPL_IS_PASV; | | long removalTimeoutSeconds() default CacheConfig.DEFAULT_REMOVAL_TIMEOUT_SECONDS; | } Am i right in saying: 1) For Non-Clustered: The @org.jboss.ejb3.annotation.CacheConfig is required to be used on the bean as follows: @Stateful | @CacheConfig(maxSize = 1000, idleTimeoutSeconds = 1) | public class SimpleStatefulBean implements java.io.Serializable, SimpleStatefulRemote, SimpleStatefulLocal | 2) For Clustered: @Stateful | @CacheConfig(name=CacheConfig.DEFAULT_CLUSTERED_OBJECT_NAME, maxSize = 1000, idleTimeoutSeconds = 1) | @Clustered | public class SimpleStatefulBean implements java.io.Serializable, SimpleStatefulRemote, SimpleStatefulLocal | 3) For no passivation: @Stateful | @Cache(value="org.jboss.ejb3.cache.NoPassivationCache") | public class SimpleStatefulBean implements java.io.Serializable, SimpleStatefulRemote, SimpleStatefulLocal | View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4205604#4205604 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4205604

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Deployment cleanup & modifications

by adrian＠jboss.org

"alesj" wrote : | "adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | | I said this before WRT to the horrible explicit VFS Cache you did, but I was ignored. | | | Where was this? | I never (or I must really missed it) heard any idea/feedback about vfs cache. | When things were horribly slow, I thought of something. | And even then there was no feedback. | | Good, bad, horrible ... whatever ... it still only has a few lines to change if you wanna ditch that. | It was on some thread where you described the VFS cache api. I don't want you to ditch it, I just want it to be used transparently within the VFS. The programmers that write VFS code shouldn't have to be aware of the caching and code in a different way to get it. It should be configurable in an "aspectized" way. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4205601#4205601 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4205601

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: jBPM for game development?..

by tom.baeyens＠jboss.com

jbpm is the way to go. let me know if you need an extra tester for you app. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4205600#4205600 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4205600

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Enhancing demand

by alesj

This is done: JBMICROCONT-404 View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4205599#4205599 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4205599

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: MutableClassInfo?

by stale.pedersen＠jboss.org

regarding the changes to WeakClassCache ive only created a simple compare method to make sure that the cached object actually is correct. take a look at the commit above for the implementation details. - suggestions on better a solution to the WeakClassCache problem is wanted if we still want to make JavassistTypeInfo mutable compliant. if we end up creating another implementation we can do something different. - yes, i know we need to change the caching of the getDeclaredMethods/Constructors/Fields for the mutable implementation, but im waiting with that untill we decide on what to do with JTI. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4205598#4205598 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4205598

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Finding RealClassLoader in ServiceDeployer

by adrian＠jboss.org

The hierarchy search is just a hack for lazy users. Thomas should be passing in the RealClassLoader in the first place, i.e. the (sub-)deployment classloader. The one he was actually passing in is the wrapper ejb classloader which has other side affects like it is associated with the EJB's enc when used as the context classloader. This "fix" corrects the problem for JMX but not for other uses of that "deployment" classloader. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4205597#4205597 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4205597

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: MutableClassInfo?

by stale.pedersen＠jboss.org

"kabir.khan(a)jboss.com" wrote : | "alesj" wrote : | | How does this effect the (weak type) cache? | | | That is an implementation detail that needs to be reworked internally. Having Class as the key for this won't work since we don't want the class to be loaded. Internally the weak type cache stores class names in a map of cl, so this methods can work | | | TypeInfoFactory.getTypeInfo(String name, ClassLoader cl) | | | The use of WeakClassCache by Javassist will need revisiting so that it does not try to load the class every time we try to look something up since that is not needed by the underlying implementation. | im looking into JavassistTypeInfoFactoryImpl and JavassistTypeInfo with the goal of getting them Mutable compliant (eg. no usage of Class). the last remaining problem i have with this is JavassistTypeInfo.getType(). with my changes this method will always return null, but this is breaking the testsuite since there are tests that depends on this returning the actual class. from my point of view the getType() method do not have any meaning for a MutableClassInfo since the type isnt defined yet before the class has been frozen/loaded. so either we can change the getType() method or we need to create a new implementation of JavassistTypInfo that is mutable compliant. for reference, take a look at the diff here:http://github.com/stalep/jboss-reflect/commit/a1a396c2203d63ae487fc1... "kabir.khan(a)jboss.com" wrote : | Create a wiki page with the work in progress? atm im using git as a vcs, you can all take a look at it here: http://github.com/stalep/jboss-reflect - note that i can push changes from the git repo back to jboss-reflect svn when wanted. ill be posting design ideas/thoughts on a wiki too. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4205591#4205591 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4205591

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Security Deployer assuming VFSDeploymentUnit

by adrian＠jboss.org

Thomas shouldn't have to make his deployment a dummy VFSDeployment for this to work. If the SecurityDeployer (and other deployers) don't work without a VFS file then there is something wrong with them. Either they shouldn't be looking at the deployment at all or they need to be to fixed such that Thomas can pass in whatever metadata the SecurityDeployer is trying to determine from the VFS. If the fix is the latter then it shows the Security integration with the deployers is incomplete. I doubt the Tomcat deployer works without a VFS file either currently since it will want to use that to get the content for the web context. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4205590#4205590 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4205590

15 years, 3 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 January 2009