[Red Hat JIRA] (DROOLS-5729) Reorganize drools unit tests
by Toshiya Kobayashi (Jira)
[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-5729?page=com.atlassian.jira.plug... ]
Toshiya Kobayashi updated DROOLS-5729:
--------------------------------------
Description:
Motivation: The motivation is to increase test coverage. For example, unit tests which exist under drools-mvel are not tested against executable-model. "Which module is suitable for the unit test?" depends on each test so we may occasionally need to discuss. But basically drools-test-coverage is a good place for DRL based tests because drools-test-coverage may have all dependencies so is flexible to test with any configurations (e.g. alpha compiler network).
Goals: Increase test coverage. More stable product.
Impact: During this work, we may find new bugs (because of increased tests). Will need to fix them one-by-one as separated JIRAs.
was:
Motivation: The motivation is to increase test coverage. For example, unit tests which exist under drools-mvel are not tested against executable-model. "Which module is suitable for the unit test?" depends on each test so we may occasionally need to discuss. But basically drools-test-coverage is a good place for DRL based tests because drools-test-coverage may have all dependencies so is flexible to test with any configurations (e.g. alpha compiler network).
Goals: Increase test coverage. More stable product.
Impact: While this work, we may find new bugs (because of increased tests). Will need to fix them one-by-one as separated JIRAs.
> Reorganize drools unit tests
> ----------------------------
>
> Key: DROOLS-5729
> URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-5729
> Project: Drools
> Issue Type: Story
> Components: core engine
> Affects Versions: 7.44.0.Final
> Reporter: Toshiya Kobayashi
> Assignee: Toshiya Kobayashi
> Priority: Major
>
> Motivation: The motivation is to increase test coverage. For example, unit tests which exist under drools-mvel are not tested against executable-model. "Which module is suitable for the unit test?" depends on each test so we may occasionally need to discuss. But basically drools-test-coverage is a good place for DRL based tests because drools-test-coverage may have all dependencies so is flexible to test with any configurations (e.g. alpha compiler network).
> Goals: Increase test coverage. More stable product.
> Impact: During this work, we may find new bugs (because of increased tests). Will need to fix them one-by-one as separated JIRAs.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
4 months, 2 weeks
[Red Hat JIRA] (DROOLS-5729) Reorganize drools unit tests
by Toshiya Kobayashi (Jira)
[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-5729?page=com.atlassian.jira.plug... ]
Toshiya Kobayashi reassigned DROOLS-5729:
-----------------------------------------
Assignee: Toshiya Kobayashi (was: Mario Fusco)
> Reorganize drools unit tests
> ----------------------------
>
> Key: DROOLS-5729
> URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-5729
> Project: Drools
> Issue Type: Story
> Components: core engine
> Affects Versions: 7.44.0.Final
> Reporter: Toshiya Kobayashi
> Assignee: Toshiya Kobayashi
> Priority: Major
>
> Motivation: The motivation is to increase test coverage. For example, unit tests which exist under drools-mvel are not tested against executable-model. "Which module is suitable for the unit test?" depends on each test so we may occasionally need to discuss. But basically drools-test-coverage is a good place for DRL based tests because drools-test-coverage may have all dependencies so is flexible to test with any configurations (e.g. alpha compiler network).
> Goals: Increase test coverage. More stable product.
> Impact: While this work, we may find new bugs (because of increased tests). Will need to fix them one-by-one as separated JIRAs.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
4 months, 2 weeks
[Red Hat JIRA] (DROOLS-5729) Reorganize drools unit tests
by Toshiya Kobayashi (Jira)
Toshiya Kobayashi created DROOLS-5729:
-----------------------------------------
Summary: Reorganize drools unit tests
Key: DROOLS-5729
URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/DROOLS-5729
Project: Drools
Issue Type: Story
Components: core engine
Affects Versions: 7.44.0.Final
Reporter: Toshiya Kobayashi
Assignee: Mario Fusco
Motivation: The motivation is to increase test coverage. For example, unit tests which exist under drools-mvel are not tested against executable-model. "Which module is suitable for the unit test?" depends on each test so we may occasionally need to discuss. But basically drools-test-coverage is a good place for DRL based tests because drools-test-coverage may have all dependencies so is flexible to test with any configurations (e.g. alpha compiler network).
Goals: Increase test coverage. More stable product.
Impact: While this work, we may find new bugs (because of increased tests). Will need to fix them one-by-one as separated JIRAs.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
4 months, 2 weeks
[Red Hat JIRA] (WFCORE-5155) A NullPointException was found in a wildfly-jar-maven-plugin test
by Jeff Mesnil (Jira)
[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFCORE-5155?page=com.atlassian.jira.plug... ]
Jeff Mesnil updated WFCORE-5155:
--------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 13.0.2.Final
> A NullPointException was found in a wildfly-jar-maven-plugin test
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WFCORE-5155
> URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFCORE-5155
> Project: WildFly Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Logging
> Reporter: James Perkins
> Assignee: James Perkins
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 13.0.2.Final, 14.0.0.Beta1
>
>
> WFCORE-5114 made a slight change with how the configuration API commits the logging changes. When upgrading the core version in wildfly-jar-maven-plugin a test failure occurred in the PR https://github.com/wildfly-extras/wildfly-jar-maven-plugin/pull/137.
> {code}
> Error: BootLoggingConfigurationTestCase.testSocketHandler:321->executeOperation:711 Operation {
> "operation" => "composite",
> "address" => [],
> "rollback-on-runtime-failure" => true,
> "steps" => [
> {
> "operation" => "add",
> "address" => [
> ("socket-binding-group" => "standard-sockets"),
> ("remote-destination-outbound-socket-binding" => "log-server")
> ],
> "host" => "127.0.0.1",
> "port" => 10514
> },
> {
> "operation" => "add",
> "address" => [
> ("subsystem" => "logging"),
> ("socket-handler" => "socket")
> ],
> "named-formatter" => "PATTERN",
> "outbound-socket-binding-ref" => "log-server"
> },
> {
> "operation" => "add-handler",
> "address" => [
> ("subsystem" => "logging"),
> ("root-logger" => "ROOT")
> ],
> "name" => "socket"
> }
> ]
> } failed: {"WFLYCTL0062: Composite operation failed and was rolled back. Steps that failed:" => {"Operation step-2" => {"WFLYCTL0080: Failed services" => {"org.wildfly.logging.handler.\"org.wildfly.logging.handler.socket\"" => "Failed to start service
> Caused by: java.lang.NullPointerException"}}}}
> {code}
> The NPE is in the service where the {{DelayedHandler}} instance is used, but returns {{null}} for some reason. I could not reproduce this locally, however it did happen locally for me with the {{ascyn-handler}} in the test. This may be a way to reproduce this locally.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
4 months, 2 weeks
[Red Hat JIRA] (WFLY-13871) Re-implement correct suspend/resume behaviour for EJB client
by Richard Achmatowicz (Jira)
[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFLY-13871?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugi... ]
Richard Achmatowicz edited comment on WFLY-13871 at 10/14/20 8:06 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Some further comments on this issue.
After looking in other parts of the codebase, I see that there *already is* a mechanism in place for advising EJB clients of suspend/resume events on the server, but it seems like it is just not working correctly. I'm going to try to describe the mechanism, which is related to https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFLY-7207
Here is a brief summary: when an invocation for EJB component C arrives at the server, it passes through EjbSuspendInterceptor. This interceptor checks the ControlPoint for component C to see if the invocation is allowed to proceed, according to the statistics collected by the RequestController subsystem. If it is not allowed to proceed, before rejecting the invocation, a service EjbSuspendHandlerService is checked to see if *it* thinks the invocation should be allowed to proceed. EjbSuspendHandlerService decides whether or not an invocation should proceed based on two counts that it keeps: a count of active invocations, and a count of active transactions. If a transaction is active, it lets the invocation proceed, as transaction completion may depend on the invocation completing. This is the point of WFLY-7207, to provide a kind of clean shutdown for active transactions. EjbSuspendHandlerService will only report that an invocation may not proceed when (roughly speaking) there are no longer any active transactions on the server. This behaviour is activated by an attribute, gracefulTransactionShutdown, of the EJB subsystem. If gracefulTransactionShutdown is true, the EjbSuspendInterceptor will wait until all active transactions have completed; if false, it will not.
EjbSuspendInterceptor takes information from the SuspendController (i.e. it is a listener for suspend/resume events) and takes information from LocalTransactionContext (i.e. it listens for transaction create and transaction completion events). It also keeps track of active invocations, via calls from EjbSuspendInterceptor.
In addition to this, EjbSuspendHandlerService, once it receives a suspend event from the SuspendController, it will tell the LocalTransactionContext to prohibit the creation of any new transactions which are created with a call to beginTransaction which has the parameter failOnSuspend == true. It will also wait for any active transactions to complete (either commit or rollback) and when the last one completes, it will do two things: notify the SuspendController that, as a ServerActivity listener, it is ready to suspend, and secondly, it suspends the DeploymentRepositoryService by calling DeploymentRepository.suspend().
The DeploymentRepository, when suspended, sends out deploymentSuspended() notifications to all DeploymentRepository listeners for all currently deployed modules, and sends out deploymentAvailable() followed by deploymentSuspended() notifications for any subsequently deployed modules. When the DeploymentRepository is later resumed (by the EjbSuspendHandlerService), it sends out deploymentResumed () notifications to all DeploymentRepository listeners.
These deploymentSuspended() and deploymentResumed() notifications get converted into moduleUnavailable() and moduleUnavailable() messages (via registration of the ModuleAvailabilityListener) sent out to all EJB clients connected to the server.
So, this arrangement *should* be providing the correct sequence of moduleUnAvailable and moduleAvailable messages to EJB clients, but something is going wrong somewhere.
So, to summarise, the current PR will be thrown out and i'll focus on fixing the existing mechanism.
was (Author: rachmato):
Some further comments on this issue.
After looking in other parts of the codebase, I see that there *already is* a mechanism in place for advising EJB clients of suspend/resume events on the server, but it seems like it is just not working correctly. I'm going to try to describe the mechanism, which is related to https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFLY-7207
Here is a brief summary: when an invocation for EJB component C arrives at the server, it passes through EjbSuspendInterceptor. This interceptor checks the ControlPoint for component C to see if the invocation is allowed to proceed, according to the statistics collected by the RequestController subsystem. If it is not allowed to proceed, before rejecting the invocation, a service EjbSuspendHandlerService is checked to see if *it* thinks the invocation should be allowed to proceed. EjbSuspendHandlerService decides whether or not an invocation should proceed based on two counts that it keeps: a count of active invocations, and a count of active transactions. If a transaction is active, it lets the invocation proceed, as transaction completion may depend on the invocation completing. This is the point of WFLY-7207, to provide a kind of clean shutdown for active transactions. EjbSuspendHandlerService will only report that an invocation may not proceed when (roughly speaking) there are no longer any active transactions on the server. This behaviour is activated by an attribute, gracefulTransactionShutdown, of the EJB subsystem. If gracefulTransactionShutdown is true, the EjbSuspendInterceptor will wait until all active transactions have completed; if false, it will not.
EjbSuspendInterceptor takes information from the SuspendController (i.e. it is a listener for suspend/resume events) and takes information from LocalTransactionContext (i.e. it listens for transaction create and transaction completion events). It also keeps track of active invocations, via calls from EjbSuspendInterceptor.
In addition to this, EjbSuspendHandlerService, once it receives a suspend event from the SuspendController, it will tell the LocalTransactionContext to prohibit the creation of any new transactions which are created with a call to beginTransaction which has the parameter failOnSuspend == true. It will also wait for any active transactions to complete (either commit or rollback) and when the last one completes, it will do two things: notify the SuspendController that, as a ServerActivity listener, it is ready to suspend, and secondly, it suspends the DeploymentRepositoryService by calling DeploymentRepository.suspend().
The DeploymentRepository, when suspended, sends out deploymentSuspended() notifications to all DeploymentRepository listeners for all currently deployed modules, and sends out deploymentAvailable() followed by deploymentSuspended() notifications for any subsequently deployed modules. When the DeploymentRepository is later resumed (by the EjbSuspendHandlerService), it sends out deploymentResumed () notifications to all DeploymentRepository listeners.
These deploymentSuspended() and deploymentResumed() notifications get converted into moduleUnavailable() and moduleUnavailable() messages sent out to all EJB clients connected to the server.
So, this arrangement should be providing the correct sequence of moduleUnAvailable and moduleAvailable messages to EJB clients, but something is going wrong somewhere.
So, to summarise, the current PR will be thrown out and i'll focus on fixing the existing mechanism.
> Re-implement correct suspend/resume behaviour for EJB client
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WFLY-13871
> URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFLY-13871
> Project: WildFly
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: EJB
> Affects Versions: 21.0.0.Beta1
> Reporter: Richard Achmatowicz
> Assignee: Richard Achmatowicz
> Priority: Major
> Labels: downstream_dependency
> Fix For: 22.0.0.Beta1
>
>
> When a server is suspended, in order to avoid receipt of invocations which will never be correctly processed, all connected clients should be notified that all modules on that server are now unavailable; when the server is resumed, all connected clients should be notified that all modules on that server are now again available so that the server may again take part in processing invocations.
> This behaviour was present in versions of EAP before EAP 7.1 but was not ported over to the new EJB client server-side classes which were substantially refactored.
> This issue will re-instante that behaviour. The two cases of standalone and clustered deployments should be considered.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
4 months, 2 weeks
[Red Hat JIRA] (WFLY-13871) Re-implement correct suspend/resume behaviour for EJB client
by Richard Achmatowicz (Jira)
[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFLY-13871?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugi... ]
Richard Achmatowicz edited comment on WFLY-13871 at 10/14/20 5:01 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Some further comments on this issue.
After looking in other parts of the codebase, I see that there *already is* a mechanism in place for advising EJB clients of suspend/resume events on the server, but it seems like it is just not working correctly. I'm going to try to describe the mechanism, which is related to https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFLY-7207
Here is a brief summary: when an invocation for EJB component C arrives at the server, it passes through EjbSuspendInterceptor. This interceptor checks the ControlPoint for component C to see if the invocation is allowed to proceed, according to the statistics collected by the RequestController subsystem. If it is not allowed to proceed, before rejecting the invocation, a service EjbSuspendHandlerService is checked to see if *it* thinks the invocation should be allowed to proceed. EjbSuspendHandlerService decides whether or not an invocation should proceed based on two counts that it keeps: a count of active invocations, and a count of active transactions. If a transaction is active, it lets the invocation proceed, as transaction completion may depend on the invocation completing. This is the point of WFLY-7207, to provide a kind of clean shutdown for active transactions. EjbSuspendHandlerService will only report that an invocation may not proceed when (roughly speaking) there are no longer any active transactions on the server. This behaviour is activated by an attribute, gracefulTransactionShutdown, of the EJB subsystem. If gracefulTransactionShutdown is true, the EjbSuspendInterceptor will wait until all active transactions have completed; if false, it will not.
EjbSuspendInterceptor takes information from the SuspendController (i.e. it is a listener for suspend/resume events) and takes information from LocalTransactionContext (i.e. it listens for transaction create and transaction completion events). It also keeps track of active invocations, via calls from EjbSuspendInterceptor.
In addition to this, EjbSuspendHandlerService, once it receives a suspend event from the SuspendController, it will tell the LocalTransactionContext to prohibit the creation of any new transactions which are created with a call to beginTransaction which has the parameter failOnSuspend == true. It will also wait for any active transactions to complete (either commit or rollback) and when the last one completes, it will do two things: notify the SuspendController that, as a ServerActivity listener, it is ready to suspend, and secondly, it suspends the DeploymentRepositoryService by calling DeploymentRepository.suspend().
The DeploymentRepository, when suspended, sends out deploymentSuspended() notifications to all DeploymentRepository listeners for all currently deployed modules, and sends out deploymentAvailable() followed by deploymentSuspended() notifications for any subsequently deployed modules. When the DeploymentRepository is later resumed (by the EjbSuspendHandlerService), it sends out deploymentResumed () notifications to all DeploymentRepository listeners.
These deploymentSuspended() and deploymentResumed() notifications get converted into moduleUnavailable() and moduleUnavailable() messages sent out to all EJB clients connected to the server.
So, this arrangement should be providing the correct sequence of moduleUnAvailable and moduleAvailable messages to EJB clients, but something is going wrong somewhere.
So, to summarise, the current PR will be thrown out and i'll focus on fixing the existing mechanism.
was (Author: rachmato):
Some further comments on this issue. After looking in other parts of the codebase, I see that there *already is* a mechanism in place for advising EJB clients of suspend/resume events on the server, but it seems like it is just not working correctly. I'm going to try to describe the mechanism, which is related to https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFLY-7207
Here is a brief summary: when an invocation for EJB component C arrives at the server, it passes through EjbSuspendInterceptor. This interceptor checks the ControlPoint for component C to see if the invocation is allowed to proceed. If it is not allowed to proceed, before rejecting the invocation, a service EjbSuspendHandlerService is checked to see if *it* thinks the invocation should be allowed to proceed. EjbSuspendHandlerService decides whether or not an invocation should proceed based on two counts that it keeps: a count of active invocations, and a count of active transactions. If a transaction is active, it lets the invocation proceed, as transaction completion may depend on the invocation completing. EjbSuspendHandlerService will only report that an invocation may not proceed when (roughly speaking) there are no longer any active transactions on the server. This behaviour is controlled by an attribute, gracefulTransactionShutdown, of the EJB subsyetem. If gracefulTransactionShutdown is true, the EjbSuspendInterceptor will wait until all active transactions have completed; if false, it will not.
EjbSuspendInterceptor takes information from the SuspendController (i.e. it is a listener for suspend/resume events) and takes information from LocalTransactionContext (i.e. it listens for transaction create and transaction completion events). It also keeps track of active invocations, via calls from EjbSuspendInterceptor.
In addition to this, EjbSuspendHandlerService, once it receives a suspend event from the SuspendController, it will tell the LocalTransactionContext to prohibit the creation of any new transactions which are created with a call to beginTransaction which has the parameter failOnSuspend == true. It will also wait for any active transactions to complete (either commit or rollback) and when the last one completes, it will do two things: notify the SuspendController that, as a ServerActivity kistener, it is ready to suspend, and secondly, it suspends the DeploymentRepositoryService by calling DeploymentRepository.suspend().
The DeploymentRepository, when suspended, sends out deploymentSuspended() notifications to all DeploymentRepository listeners for all currently deployed modules, and sends out deploymentAvailable() followed by deploymentSuspended() notifications for any subsequently deployed modules. When the DeploymentRepository is later resumed (by the EjbSuspendHandlerService), it sends out deploymentResumed () notifications to all DeploymentRepository listeners.
These deploymentSuspended() and deploymentResumed() notifications get converted into moduleUnavailable() and moduleUnavailable() messages sent out to all EJB clients connected to the server.
So, this arrangement should be providing the correct sequence of moduleUnAvailable and moduleAvailable messages to EJB clients, but something is going wrong somewhere.
So, to summarise, the current PR will be thrown out and i'll focus on fixing the existing mechanism.
> Re-implement correct suspend/resume behaviour for EJB client
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WFLY-13871
> URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFLY-13871
> Project: WildFly
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: EJB
> Affects Versions: 21.0.0.Beta1
> Reporter: Richard Achmatowicz
> Assignee: Richard Achmatowicz
> Priority: Major
> Labels: downstream_dependency
> Fix For: 22.0.0.Beta1
>
>
> When a server is suspended, in order to avoid receipt of invocations which will never be correctly processed, all connected clients should be notified that all modules on that server are now unavailable; when the server is resumed, all connected clients should be notified that all modules on that server are now again available so that the server may again take part in processing invocations.
> This behaviour was present in versions of EAP before EAP 7.1 but was not ported over to the new EJB client server-side classes which were substantially refactored.
> This issue will re-instante that behaviour. The two cases of standalone and clustered deployments should be considered.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
4 months, 2 weeks
[Red Hat JIRA] (WFLY-13871) Re-implement correct suspend/resume behaviour for EJB client
by Richard Achmatowicz (Jira)
[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFLY-13871?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugi... ]
Richard Achmatowicz commented on WFLY-13871:
--------------------------------------------
Some further comments on this issue. After looking in other parts of the codebase, I see that there *already is* a mechanism in place for advising EJB clients of suspend/resume events on the server, but it seems like it is just not working correctly. I'm going to try to describe the mechanism, which is related to https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFLY-7207
Here is a brief summary: when an invocation for EJB component C arrives at the server, it passes through EjbSuspendInterceptor. This interceptor checks the ControlPoint for component C to see if the invocation is allowed to proceed. If it is not allowed to proceed, before rejecting the invocation, a service EjbSuspendHandlerService is checked to see if *it* thinks the invocation should be allowed to proceed. EjbSuspendHandlerService decides whether or not an invocation should proceed based on two counts that it keeps: a count of active invocations, and a count of active transactions. If a transaction is active, it lets the invocation proceed, as transaction completion may depend on the invocation completing. EjbSuspendHandlerService will only report that an invocation may not proceed when (roughly speaking) there are no longer any active transactions on the server. This behaviour is controlled by an attribute, gracefulTransactionShutdown, of the EJB subsyetem. If gracefulTransactionShutdown is true, the EjbSuspendInterceptor will wait until all active transactions have completed; if false, it will not.
EjbSuspendInterceptor takes information from the SuspendController (i.e. it is a listener for suspend/resume events) and takes information from LocalTransactionContext (i.e. it listens for transaction create and transaction completion events). It also keeps track of active invocations, via calls from EjbSuspendInterceptor.
In addition to this, EjbSuspendHandlerService, once it receives a suspend event from the SuspendController, it will tell the LocalTransactionContext to prohibit the creation of any new transactions which are created with a call to beginTransaction which has the parameter failOnSuspend == true. It will also wait for any active transactions to complete (either commit or rollback) and when the last one completes, it will do two things: notify the SuspendController that, as a ServerActivity kistener, it is ready to suspend, and secondly, it suspends the DeploymentRepositoryService by calling DeploymentRepository.suspend().
The DeploymentRepository, when suspended, sends out deploymentSuspended() notifications to all DeploymentRepository listeners for all currently deployed modules, and sends out deploymentAvailable() followed by deploymentSuspended() notifications for any subsequently deployed modules. When the DeploymentRepository is later resumed (by the EjbSuspendHandlerService), it sends out deploymentResumed () notifications to all DeploymentRepository listeners.
These deploymentSuspended() and deploymentResumed() notifications get converted into moduleUnavailable() and moduleUnavailable() messages sent out to all EJB clients connected to the server.
So, this arrangement should be providing the correct sequence of moduleUnAvailable and moduleAvailable messages to EJB clients, but something is going wrong somewhere.
So, to summarise, the current PR will be thrown out and i'll focus on fixing the existing mechanism.
> Re-implement correct suspend/resume behaviour for EJB client
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WFLY-13871
> URL: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WFLY-13871
> Project: WildFly
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: EJB
> Affects Versions: 21.0.0.Beta1
> Reporter: Richard Achmatowicz
> Assignee: Richard Achmatowicz
> Priority: Major
> Labels: downstream_dependency
> Fix For: 22.0.0.Beta1
>
>
> When a server is suspended, in order to avoid receipt of invocations which will never be correctly processed, all connected clients should be notified that all modules on that server are now unavailable; when the server is resumed, all connected clients should be notified that all modules on that server are now again available so that the server may again take part in processing invocations.
> This behaviour was present in versions of EAP before EAP 7.1 but was not ported over to the new EJB client server-side classes which were substantially refactored.
> This issue will re-instante that behaviour. The two cases of standalone and clustered deployments should be considered.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.13.8#713008)
4 months, 2 weeks