[JBossWS] - standard BASIC AUTH
by sfisque
i am trying to deploy a pojo endpoint webservice facade to an ORM library in JBoss 4.2.2. on Solaris 10.
i have the entities deploying fine, and the facades and webservice endpoint are deploying fine as well.
all of this is in a .JAR file with no WEB-INF or other webapp kruft.
i have been able to secure my web service using the JBoss proprietary annotations (SecurityDomain and WebContext) without much problem.
my question is, is there a way to do a .JAR deployment (no WEB-INF/web.xml) that would allow me to secure the endpoint without using any proprietary annotations or linkages. i am hoping to create a deployment that is container agnostic if possible (i've been able to keep all the entity annotations limited to JPA standard ones, so far)
TIA
== stanton
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4166032#4166032
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4166032
17 years, 9 months
[JBoss Cache: Core Edition] - Re: JBoss Cache performance looks pretty poor :(
by phpguy99
Reposting my config again now with code-tag:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
jboss:service=Naming
jboss:service=TransactionManager
org.jboss.cache.transaction.GenericTransactionManagerLookup
READ_COMMITTED
false
REPL_SYNC
JBossCache-Cluster
<UDP mcast_addr="228.1.2.3" mcast_port="48866"
ip_ttl="64" ip_mcast="true"
mcast_send_buf_size="150000" mcast_recv_buf_size="80000"
ucast_send_buf_size="150000" ucast_recv_buf_size="80000"
loopback="false"/>
<PING timeout="2000" num_initial_members="3"/>
<MERGE2 min_interval="10000" max_interval="20000"/>
<FD_SOCK/>
<VERIFY_SUSPECT timeout="1500"/>
<pbcast.NAKACK gc_lag="50" retransmit_timeout="600,1200,2400,4800" />
<pbcast.STABLE desired_avg_gossip="400000"/>
<FC max_credits="2000000" min_threshold="0.10"/>
<FRAG2 frag_size="8192"/>
<pbcast.GMS join_timeout="5000" shun="true" print_local_addr="true"/>
<pbcast.STATE_TRANSFER/>
20000
20000
15000
$ jmap -histo 14359 ## for 200,000 of my object in the cache.
num #instances #bytes class name
----------------------------------------------
1: 6058302 290798496 java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantLock$NonfairSync
2: 6058260 290796480 java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$Segment
3: 6058260 198060352 [Ljava.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$HashEntry;
4: 379178 57632968 [Ljava.util.HashMap$Entry;
5: 378642 57553488 [Ljava.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$Segment;
6: 765551 57436024 [C
7: 378601 33316888 org.jboss.cache.UnversionedNode
8: 763508 30540320 java.lang.String
9: 378601 30288080 org.jboss.cache.invocation.NodeInvocationDelegate
10: 378642 27262224 java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap
11: 378600 27259200 org.jboss.cache.lock.NonBlockingWriterLock
12: 379058 24259712 java.util.HashMap
13: 383949 18429552 java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$HashEntry
14: 379889 18234672 java.util.HashMap$Entry
15: 378600 18172800 org.jboss.cache.lock.IdentityLock
16: 396538 15881688 [Ljava.lang.Object;
17: 384436 15377440 java.util.ArrayList
18: 381480 15259200 org.jboss.cache.Fqn
19: 378599 15143960 com.ssn.jbosscache.Meter
20: 378600 12115200 org.jboss.cache.lock.LockMap
21: 378600 9086400 org.jboss.cache.lock.ReadWriteLockWithUpgrade$WriterLock
22: 378600 9086400 org.jboss.cache.lock.ReadWriteLockWithUpgrade$ReaderLock
23: 378600 9086400 org.jboss.cache.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashSet
24: 378600 9086400 org.jboss.cache.lock.LockStrategyReadCommitted
25: 21274 2804184
26: 21274 2560560
27: 1838 2036776
28: 33111 1620128
29: 1838 1356816
30: 1612 1315584
31: 2919 552944 [I
32: 2123 544336 [B
33: 2989 454328 java.lang.reflect.Method
34: 2008 369472 java.lang.Class
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4166028#4166028
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4166028
17 years, 9 months
[JBoss jBPM] - Re: jBPM versus MS Workflow
by kukeltje
Uhm.... my personal comments
- .NET 3.5 is stable, just like jBPM 3.2.3 is stable... or JDK 1.5.0_02 is stable. If you would have said .NET is stable, then it is a different thing (4 releases in?). The jBPM API has not changed that much in the last 2 years, so I'd say it is quite stable.
>From your statement I cannot determine where persistence and thread synchronization (aren't they two only partly related things?) are more robust in MS Workflow then in jBPM. The latter uses Hibernate which is really robust. The relation with Rich Clients is totally unclear to me, since jBPM can be used in stand-alone, pure web or rich client implementations. If you could elaborate a little more, I can try to comment.
Comparing the MS Workflow 'platform' to jBPM is imo comparing apples to grapes (not even oranges). I think you should include SEAM, JBossTools etc... to have a real comparison (I do not know the details of MS Workflow)
So even with my basic knowledge of MS Workflow, I have to say you statement of 'superiour' is a bold statement and needs more detailed arguments (yes, I'm biased, but I get the feeling you are to ;-) )
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4166022#4166022
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4166022
17 years, 9 months