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

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: caching the initial session created

by ataylor

aye, thats what Ive done. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4219873#4219873 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4219873

17 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: Common marshalling infrastructure

by manik.surtani＠jboss.com

"galder.zamarreno(a)jboss.com" wrote : | So, in spite of agreeing with Jason's statement in https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBCACHE-1336 earlier today: | | anonymous wrote : It might be more useful to define type marshallers outside of the type since most of our magic numbers apply to types not under our control (JDK types). | | I don't think this might apply any longer if the above points can be resolved. IOW, all types that are not under our control would already be handled by JBoss Marshalling which means that we can concentrate on our types and we could then use @Marshallable annotations. | Not true. Outside of our control != JDK classes. E.g., a JGroups IpAddress is something we marshall. We can't annotate these and JBoss Marshalling certainly doesn't know about this. :-) While I agree that using annotations is more natural, I sadly think that this is inadequate. Perhaps what we could do is to use annotations for classes under our control, and then supplement with an XML based magic-map for classes outside of our control. Adds unnecessary complexity, but I can see how this does make the code easier, more readable. We would definitely need a unit test though to ensure we don't have colliding magic numbers. :-) View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4219827#4219827 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4219827

17 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: caching the initial session created

by timfox

Well, are there two sessions or one session? If you're creating two sessions now, then you need to reflect that in the asserts too, right? View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4219812#4219812 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4219812

17 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: caching the initial session created

by ataylor

JMSServerControl2Test, the point is if there is 1 connection with 1 session, service.getServer().getConnectionCount() will return 2. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4219807#4219807 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4219807

17 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: caching the initial session created

by timfox

What test is that? View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4219804#4219804 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4219804

17 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: caching the initial session created

by ataylor

ok thats fine, I was just wondering how we would deal with this at a management leve, for instance the following test: | Connection connection = JMSUtil.createConnection(connectorFactory); | connection.createSession(false, Session.AUTO_ACKNOWLEDGE); | assertEquals(1, service.getServer().getConnectionCount()); | would always fail since there are actually 2 connections, is that fine? View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4219802#4219802 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4219802

17 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: caching the initial session created

by timfox

"ataylor" wrote : Currently when we create a new jms connection we only actually create a session if we are authenticating and then we close it once authentication has taken place. | | I'm changing this so that firstly we always authorize and secondly caching the initial session and reusing it for the first actual session created. The only issue is that the initial core session is created with xa, autoCommitSends, autoCommitAcks and preAcknowledge set to false and ackBatchSize set to 0. O though the best thing was to add an extra method to core session to allow these values to be reset. Not sure that is a good idea. You'd have to change the values on the server too, that means adding a new wire format message - pretty ugly. I'd say just cache the special session locally in the jms connection and only use it for initial authorisation and delting temp queeus etc. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4219795#4219795 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4219795

17 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: caching the initial session created

by ataylor

also when the last session is closed we keep the initial connection open. This can be used for deleting tempqueues als when the connection is actually closed View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4219788#4219788 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4219788

17 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - caching the initial session created

by ataylor

Currently when we create a new jms connection we only actually create a session if we are authenticating and then we close it once authentication has taken place. I'm changing this so that firstly we always authorize and secondly caching the initial session and reusing it for the first actual session created. The only issue is that the initial core session is created with xa, autoCommitSends, autoCommitAcks and preAcknowledge set to false and ackBatchSize set to 0. O though the best thing was to add an extra method to core session to allow these values to be reset. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4219784#4219784 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4219784

17 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: How to supress Netty connection exception logging

by jmesnil

"timfox" wrote : | Naughty people putting printStackTrace in the code! ;) Yeah! If only we could have a tool to know who are these people... What? "svn blame"? who is "jmesnil"? ... mmmh....errr.... ok, I've removed all these printStackTrace :) View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4219742#4219742 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4219742

17 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 March 2009