[jboss-dev-forums] [Design of EJB 3.0] - Changes to pointcut expressions in ejb3-interceptors-aop.xml
Our current pointcut expressions for domains which introduce annotations on joinpoints in
ejb3-interceptor-aop.xml don't work as expected. For example:
<domain name="Stateless Bean" extends="Intercepted Bean"
inheritBindings="true">
| ...
| <annotation expr="!class((a)org.jboss.ejb3.annotation.Pool)">
| @org.jboss.ejb3.annotation.Pool (value="ThreadlocalPool",
maxSize=30, timeout=10000)
| </annotation>
|
This annotation element is expected to introduce a @org.jboss.ejb3.annotation.Pool on
stateless beans (classes) which do not already have this. However this incorrectly
introduces the annotation on the bean class, all its fields and all its methods and
effectively leads to a performance degradation.
The pointcut expression needs to be changed to either:
Carlo's workaround:
class(*) AND !class((a)org.jboss.ejb3.annotation.Pool)
or what Kabir suggests in
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=153447
class($instanceof{java.lang.Object}) AND !class((a)org.jboss.ejb3.annotation.Pool)
Both these expresssions fix the issue. We need to change the pointcut expression for all
those domains which introduce the annotations. I have tested Carlo's workaround on a
sample application against the AS. Haven't yet tested the other one (with an EJB app
on AS). From my limited knowledge of pointcut expressions, there's not much difference
in these 2 expressions, so if there are no objections i'll commit Carlo's pointcut
expression (and run the testsuite :) )
Any thoughts?
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4225250#...
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...