I've analyzed the SPI differences between the cluster-dev branch and trunk's
ejb3-cache:
https://www.jboss.org/community/servlet/JiveServlet/download/9565-24-5989...
Can be summarized as:
1) Some minor stuff we just need to sort. Names, stuff missing in one or other that
obviously needs to be there, etc.
2) StatefulObjectFactory.create(..) method -- cluster-dev branch's shared state map
idea. I believe a version of the shared state map concept could be implemented easily
enough by our existing StatefulCache impls; i.e. there is a path to compatibility.
3) Replace current call pattern of Cache.create() returns StatefulBeanContext with
Cache.create() returns "id", followed by call to Cache.get("id")
returns StatefulBeanContext. Shouldn't be a big deal.
4) StatefulContainer (or some delegate) implements PassivationManager. This might be a bit
tricky because StatefulTreeCache currently calls some extra StatefulContainer methods that
aren't in PassivationManager and aren't needed by the cluster-dev impl. So have
to think a bit about that.
5) Deal with the cache factory stuff, which is somewhat orthogonal, except for the fact
that a Cache has a ref to a StatefulObjectFactory and a PassivationManager, both of which
are presumably implemented by the container. So if we inject the cache into the container,
the container will have to pass back a ref to whatever implements those interfaces.
Sorry, Andrew, this particular post is somewhat hijacking your thread....
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4185876#...
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...