February 2007 - jboss-jira - Jboss List Archives

[JBoss JIRA] Created: (EJBTHREE-667) IIOP binding

by Carlo de Wolf (JIRA)

IIOP binding ------------ Key: EJBTHREE-667 URL: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/EJBTHREE-667 Project: EJB 3.0 Issue Type: Task Reporter: Carlo de Wolf Fix For: EJB 3.0 RC9 - FD Make IIOP binding work in the EJB3 stack. To use IIOP on an EJB bean, the following code is used: @RemoteBinding(factory=org.jboss.ejb3.iiop.IORFactory.class) -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

19 years, 4 months

2
3
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] Created: (EJBTHREE-666) Throw javax.ejb.ConcurrentAccessException when two threads access the same SFSB instance

by Gavin King (JIRA)

Throw javax.ejb.ConcurrentAccessException when two threads access the same SFSB instance ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Key: EJBTHREE-666 URL: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/EJBTHREE-666 Project: EJB 3.0 Issue Type: Bug Affects Versions: EJB 3.0 RC8 - FD Reporter: Gavin King Priority: Critical Fix For: EJB 3.0 RC9 - FD See section 4.13.3 of the EJB Core Contracts specification. I need this for Seam. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

19 years, 4 months

3
5
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] Created: (EJBTHREE-659) SFSB throws exception with second passivation

by Ben Wang (JIRA)

SFSB throws exception with second passivation --------------------------------------------- Key: EJBTHREE-659 URL: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/EJBTHREE-659 Project: EJB 3.0 Issue Type: Bug Affects Versions: EJB 3.0 RC8 - FD Reporter: Ben Wang Assigned To: Ben Wang Fix For: EJB 3.0 RC9 - FD I have created a test case to illustrate this for both SimpleStatefulCache and StatefulTreeCache, NestedBeanUnitTestCase (cache and clusteredsession). Basically, if we do this: bean.getXXX sleep(10000); // to passivate bean.getXXX; // to acitvate sleep(10000); // to passivate again This will produce: 2006-07-24 04:46:59,358 ERROR [org.jboss.ejb3.cache.simple.SimpleStatefulCache] problem passivation thread^M javax.ejb.EJBException: Could not passivate; failed to save state^M at org.jboss.ejb3.cache.simple.StatefulSessionFilePersistenceManager.passivateSession(StatefulSessionFilePersistenceManager.java:363)^M at org.jboss.ejb3.cache.simple.SimpleStatefulCache.passivate(SimpleStatefulCache.java:196)^M at org.jboss.ejb3.cache.simple.SimpleStatefulCache$SessionTimeoutTask.run(SimpleStatefulCache.java:129)^M Caused by: java.lang.NullPointerException^M at org.jboss.serial.util.StringUtil.calculateUTFSize(StringUtil.java:319)^M at org.jboss.serial.util.StringUtil.saveString(StringUtil.java:63)^M at org.jboss.serial.objectmetamodel.DataContainer$DataContainerDirectOutput.writeUTF(DataContainer.java:265)^M at org.jboss.ejb3.stateful.StatefulBeanContextReference.writeExternal(StatefulBeanContextReference.java:65)^M at org.jboss.serial.persister.ExternalizePersister.writeData(ExternalizePersister.java:58)^M at org.jboss.serial.objectmetamodel.ObjectDescriptorFactory.describeObject(ObjectDescriptorFactory.java:275)^M at org.jboss.serial.objectmetamodel.DataContainer$DataContainerDirectOutput.writeObject(DataContainer.java:197)^M at org.jboss.serial.io.JBossObjectOutputStream.writeObjectOverride(JBossObjectOutputStream.java:181)^M at java.io.ObjectOutputStream.writeObject(ObjectOutputStream.java:287)^M at org.jboss.ejb3.cache.simple.StatefulSessionFilePersistenceManager.passivateSession(StatefulSessionFilePersistenceManager.java:347)^M ... 2 more^M This is caused by a bug from ProxiedStatefuleBeanContext serialization where we dont serialiaze parentRef if it is not null. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

19 years, 4 months

2
2
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] Created: (EJBTHREE-660) Nested sfsb passivation notification is incorrect

by Ben Wang (JIRA)

Nested sfsb passivation notification is incorrect ------------------------------------------------- Key: EJBTHREE-660 URL: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/EJBTHREE-660 Project: EJB 3.0 Issue Type: Bug Affects Versions: EJB 3.0 RC8 - FD Reporter: Ben Wang Assigned To: Ben Wang Fix For: EJB 3.0 RC9 - FD Current sfsb activation/passivation notification relies on read/writeExternal. This is semnatically not correct since replication also relies on serialization. So each replication would trigger a activation/passivation pair. I don't believe ejb3 specifies specifically activation/passivation to serialization (there is no word on how to perform passivation actually). So a better way is to decouple this. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

19 years, 4 months

2
2
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] Created: (EJBTHREE-653) No pooling for stateless session beans

by Guido Bening (JIRA)

No pooling for stateless session beans -------------------------------------- Key: EJBTHREE-653 URL: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/EJBTHREE-653 Project: EJB 3.0 Issue Type: Bug Components: EJB3 Extensions Affects Versions: EJB 3.0 RC8 - FD Environment: OS: Windows XP SP2 JDK 1.5.0_06_b05 JBoss AS 4.0.4 GA Reporter: Guido Bening Scenario: Client VM calls a method on a EJB 2 Stateful Session Bean (SFSB) via the remote interface in a loop for 1000 times.Transaction starts on the application server. The SFSB method calls a method on a EJB3 Stateless Session Bean (SLSB) - via the remote interface (local interface makes no difference). The print out in the PostConstruct callback method of the EJB3 SLSB shows us, that a new bean instance was created for each of the 1000 method calls. Because of ThreadLocal pooling approach, we print out the Thread id too to show, that we always have the same Thread for each method call. CallBack method: /** * EJBCreate method. */ @PostConstruct public void ejb3Create() { System.out.println("New SessionBean " + this); System.out.println("Thread " + Thread.currentThread().getId()); setupBean(); } And the log for a few of the 1000 calls: ... 09:17:51,119 INFO [STDOUT] New SessionBean com.jcoffee.components.um3.UserManagementComponent3@231ae2 09:17:51,129 INFO [STDOUT] Thread 97 09:17:51,139 INFO [STDOUT] New SessionBean com.jcoffee.components.um3.UserManagementComponent3@1662174 09:17:51,139 INFO [STDOUT] Thread 97 09:17:51,219 INFO [STDOUT] New SessionBean com.jcoffee.components.um3.UserManagementComponent3@189f155 09:17:51,219 INFO [STDOUT] Thread 97 09:17:51,239 INFO [STDOUT] New SessionBean com.jcoffee.components.um3.UserManagementComponent3@1a82dfb 09:17:51,239 INFO [STDOUT] Thread 97 09:17:51,289 INFO [STDOUT] New SessionBean com.jcoffee.components.um3.UserManagementComponent3@198813a 09:17:51,289 INFO [STDOUT] Thread 97 09:17:51,309 INFO [STDOUT] New SessionBean com.jcoffee.components.um3.UserManagementComponent3@59eefd 09:17:51,309 INFO [STDOUT] Thread 97 09:17:51,359 INFO [STDOUT] New SessionBean com.jcoffee.components.um3.UserManagementComponent3@2e3520 09:17:51,369 INFO [STDOUT] Thread 97 09:17:51,379 INFO [STDOUT] New SessionBean com.jcoffee.components.um3.UserManagementComponent3@1ed457 09:17:51,379 INFO [STDOUT] Thread 97 09:17:51,439 INFO [STDOUT] New SessionBean com.jcoffee.components.um3.UserManagementComponent3@1e1c7f3 09:17:51,439 INFO [STDOUT] Thread 97 09:17:51,449 INFO [STDOUT] New SessionBean com.jcoffee.components.um3.UserManagementComponent3@15cb8ed 09:17:51,449 INFO [STDOUT] Thread 97 09:17:51,519 INFO [STDOUT] New SessionBean com.jcoffee.components.um3.UserManagementComponent3@1a4a949 09:17:51,519 INFO [STDOUT] Thread 97 09:17:51,529 INFO [STDOUT] New SessionBean com.jcoffee.components.um3.UserManagementComponent3@19ae0a 09:17:51,529 INFO [STDOUT] Thread 97 09:17:51,589 INFO [STDOUT] New SessionBean com.jcoffee.components.um3.UserManagementComponent3@567fa0 09:17:51,599 INFO [STDOUT] Thread 97 09:17:51,609 INFO [STDOUT] New SessionBean com.jcoffee.components.um3.UserManagementComponent3@19956fe 09:17:51,609 INFO [STDOUT] Thread 97 09:17:51,659 INFO [STDOUT] New SessionBean com.jcoffee.components.um3.UserManagementComponent3@150e574 09:17:51,669 INFO [STDOUT] Thread 97 09:17:51,679 INFO [STDOUT] New SessionBean com.jcoffee.components.um3.UserManagementComponent3@aa46ad 09:17:51,679 INFO [STDOUT] Thread 97 ... -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

19 years, 4 months

3
4
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] Created: (EJBTHREE-662) sfsb bean remove is not properly done

by Ben Wang (JIRA)

sfsb bean remove is not properly done -------------------------------------- Key: EJBTHREE-662 URL: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/EJBTHREE-662 Project: EJB 3.0 Issue Type: Bug Affects Versions: EJB 3.0 RC8 - FD Reporter: Ben Wang Assigned To: Ben Wang Fix For: EJB 3.0 RC9 - FD Currently in StatefulRemoveInterceptor, when user calls @Remove, it removes directly the bean instance in the cache. However, this is incorrect when there is nested bean involved. Correct procedure is to do StatefulBeanContext.remove() that will remove it recursively. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

19 years, 4 months

2
2
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] Created: (EJBTHREE-650) javax.ejb.SessionContext.getInvokedBusinessInterface() has wrong return type

by Carlo de Wolf (JIRA)

javax.ejb.SessionContext.getInvokedBusinessInterface() has wrong return type ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Key: EJBTHREE-650 URL: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/EJBTHREE-650 Project: EJB 3.0 Issue Type: Bug Affects Versions: EJB 3.0 RC8 - FD Reporter: Carlo de Wolf javax.ejb.SessionContext.getInvokedBusinessInterface() must return Class not Object. See http://java.sun.com/javaee/5/docs/api/javax/ejb/SessionContext.html#getIn... -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

19 years, 4 months

2
3
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] Created: (JBMICROCONT-151) Refactor DeploymentUnit to cleanup attachment usage

by Scott M Stark (JIRA)

Refactor DeploymentUnit to cleanup attachment usage --------------------------------------------------- Key: JBMICROCONT-151 URL: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBMICROCONT-151 Project: JBoss MicroContainer Issue Type: Task Components: Deployment Reporter: Scott M Stark Assigned To: Scott M Stark Fix For: JBossMC_2_0_0 Beta3 The three levels of attachments, getPredeterminedManagedObjects(), getTransientManagedObjects(), and getTransientAttachments() are not being used properly. In particular managed objects that are part of the persistent view of the deployment are being mixed with non-persistent, non-managed attachments. This is due to an api on the DeploymentUnit that facilitates the separation. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

19 years, 4 months

1
2
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] Created: (JBAS-3910) Upgrade JBoss Cache to 2.0.0.Alpha2

by Dimitris Andreadis (JIRA)

Upgrade JBoss Cache to 2.0.0.Alpha2 ----------------------------------- Key: JBAS-3910 URL: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBAS-3910 Project: JBoss Application Server Issue Type: Sub-task Security Level: Public (Everyone can see) Components: JBoss Cache Reporter: Dimitris Andreadis Assigned To: Brian Stansberry Fix For: JBossAS-5.0.0.Beta2 Decide whether to go with an JBC Alpha or Beta version -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

19 years, 4 months

2
2
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] Created: (JBAS-3862) Allow direct injection of target into HASingletonController

by Brian Stansberry (JIRA)

Allow direct injection of target into HASingletonController ----------------------------------------------------------- Key: JBAS-3862 URL: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBAS-3862 Project: JBoss Application Server Issue Type: Feature Request Security Level: Public (Everyone can see) Components: Clustering Reporter: Brian Stansberry Assigned To: Brian Stansberry Fix For: JBossAS-5.0.0.Beta1 HASingletonController currently exposes a targetName attribute of type ObjectName, and then uses JMX calls to invoke the start/stop methods on the target. We need to support direct injection of the target and invocation via reflection. The old targetName attribute should be deprecated (but still supported for backward compatiblity). -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.jboss.com/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

19 years, 4 months

3
2
0 / 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-jira February 2007