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

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: AS 5 not reliably picking up changes in exploded EAR

by max.andersen＠jboss.com

so JBoss 4 always had two copies ? If yes, then sure - I just thought the value of exploded deployment were that AS used these files *directly*. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4223933#4223933 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4223933

17 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Where are the management integration tests?

by timfox

I can see AddressControlUsingCoreTest, MessagingServerControlUsingCoreTest, QueueControlusingCoreTest. Are the other controls TODO? Also, are there any integration tests that test invoking management operations using JMS messages? View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4223925#4223925 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4223925

17 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: AS 5 not reliably picking up changes in exploded EAR

by dimitris＠jboss.org

Why not just enable copying to /tmp anyway? As you can see, not doing it requires hacks over hacks to overcome. JBoss 4 did it, and was faster than what we do now. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4223924#4223924 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4223924

17 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: More commented out tests

by jmesnil

"timfox" wrote : Also... MessagingServerControlTest These comments are leftover when I wrote the test. The clustered objects have their own MBeans which are tested in their respective tests. I'll remove the comments View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4223918#4223918 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4223918

17 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Where are the management integration tests?

by jmesnil

"timfox" wrote : Ok, I am confused here. | | I am looking through the management "integration" tests expecting to see a set of tests which basically do what the user will do. i.e. send management messages from the client to the server, and verify the results. | | But I can't find any, all I see is tests (which look more like unit tests) which call the control objects directly. | | Am I looking in the wrong place? The management integration tests use the same code base for JMX and core messages. The only differences is how they build the management interface proxy: * with JMX, it is directly the MBean Proxy * with core messages, there is a CoreMessagingProxy which proxies the management call on the client side to a core message sent to the server side This was done to have the same test codebase for both JMX and core messages. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4223916#4223916 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4223916

17 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Removing ClassLoading from jboss-bootstrap

by ALRubinger

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : As long as the called code doesn't have to worry about setting the TCL itself (error prone and it is not likely to know what the correct CL is) I don't have a problem. For this bit, I'd been planning on: * A series of *Launcher* impls to set the appropriate CLs. Clients of these can stay ignorant. * Removing CL entirely from bootstrap. S, ALR View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4223914#4223914 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4223914

17 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Removing ClassLoading from jboss-bootstrap

by wolfc

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : The basic idea is to have a pluggable bootstrap. The bootstrap.start() should run | under its own classloader as TCL not the classpath otherwise all sort of side effects | break (e.g. loading property editors, and other dynamic classloading, etc.). I still don't see how this can happen? The app classloader contains virtually nothing. "adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : In JBoss the bootstrap is two stage (actually it is multiple). | | 1) To load the bootstrap implementation itself (the mc + profile service) Profile Service isn't in scope yet. We're at rock bottom, stage #1, a bootstrapping framework with which Reloaded can bootstrap Profile Service itself. "adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | 2) To load the bootstrap xmls | | As long as the called code doesn't have to worry about setting the TCL itself | (error prone and it is not likely to know what the correct CL is) | I don't have a problem. I think I'm getting it: Bootstrap should execute the following 'psuedo' descriptor: <deployment> | <classloader>preboot-cl</classloader> | <bean class="org.jboss.bootstrap.MCServerImpl"/> | <bean class="org.jboss.bootstrap.BootstrapDeployer"/> | <classloader name="preboot-cl"> | bits and pieces specified by the launcher | </classloader> | </deployment> View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4223913#4223913 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4223913

17 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: AS 5 not reliably picking up changes in exploded EAR

by max.andersen＠jboss.com

We definitely should do this if no other option exists, BUT won't *every* app in the world that is looking up resources during undeploy have this issue ? (i.e. this is not seam specific, it is also an issue for *any* decent sized app that uses its deployed files/dependencies when undeploying) View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4223910#4223910 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4223910

17 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: jBPM 4 Emails Sync vs Async

by jbarrez

Ok, I'm following now, thanks for the overview (and also agree with the prioritization). So that's a +1 for me too ;-) View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4223895#4223895 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4223895

17 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: jBPM 4 Emails Sync vs Async

by tom.baeyens＠jboss.com

"jbarrez" wrote : Tom, I don't follow you with the global setting. I still think it should be able to be configured on the node itself. | they don't exclude each other. ideally we have them both. in the configuraiton file, the default value can be specified and in the process, the default can be overwritten. but we need to prioritize which one we build first. my take on prioritization would be this: 1) direct sending 2) global configuration setting 3) configuration per usage in the process file "jbarrez" wrote : | Imo, there are cases in which you want the mail directly: eg for handling an exception or a timer times out when waiting for an external system -> send an email to the system admin directly. | | In this case, scheduling it and waiting for the jobExecutor will cause a serious and unacceptable slow-down ... unless the jobExecutor is polling all the time (which is not good for performance). | there is no delay. even inbetween polls. the job executor is notified of new jobs by means of a synchronization. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4223890#4223890 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4223890

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 April 2009