This is the repository that Peter uses for his bnd tools. That AFAIK, all OSGi projects including the ones from the OSGi Alliance itself (i.e. for the TCK) depend on. Yes, if that repo disappears all maven based osgi projects in the world have a problem - including jboss.
anonymous wrote :
| All the JBoss builds should be based upon artifacts from the jboss repository,
|
How about the dependencies on the Sun repo for jaxb, or the plugins that we consume from the codehaus repo?
AFAICS, this is a general issue that should be addressed by who ever maintains the jboss repo. Here is a link to some maven repo aggregators
http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVENUSER/Maven+Repository+Manager+Featu...
I am not aware that we have maven repo aggregation setup anywhere - let me post this to the dev list to see what the plan is
cheers
-thomas
View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4235779#4235779
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4235779
I was thinking.. I guess this is broken.. it probably needs a fix after Beta.
The user may save a message non transactionally.. fine.. but on the server side, we shouldn' t allow half of that send be persisted. ServerSessionImpl::doSend should open/commit a transaction if the user is not opening one.
Right now, ServerSessionImpl::doSend will call PostOffice.route(msg, transaction=null). If the server crash in the middle of route.. I guess part of the data is in, part is out. (mainly on the cases with address with multi-queues).
The only case I saw a transaction being opened on PostOfficeImpl (... if tx=null) is when storing dupplicate IDs.
Any thoughts?
View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4235754#4235754
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4235754
"clebert.suconic(a)jboss.com" wrote :
|
| |
| | QueueImpl...
| | ...
| | method route ()
| | ....
| | if (tx == null)
| | {
| | if (durableRef)
| | {
| | if (!message.isStored())
| | {
| | storageManager.storeMessage(message);
| |
| | message.setStored();
| | }
| |
| | storageManager.storeReference(ref.getQueue().getPersistenceID(), message.getMessageID());
| | }
| |
| | if (scheduledDeliveryTime != null && durableRef)
| | {
| | storageManager.updateScheduledDeliveryTime(ref);
| | }
| |
| | addLast(ref);
| | }
| |
|
We would get higher numbers on blocking, non-persistent sync-non-transactions if we only had a single-sync per send. Right now each send will wait 2 syncs (both NIO and AIO).
For CR1 I know.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4235697#4235697
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4235697