On Mon, 6 Aug 2001 17:45, Michael Bachran wrote:
> I wonder if it is easy to make a Avalon component run within Phoenix and
> within any EJB-Container interchangable by making the component a EJB.
Possible yes ... but I wouldn't advise it ;)
I would pefer to keep buisness objects as EJBs and other doing utilitys as
Blocks.
> This
> way using the features of the container for any component.
> Is there allready a component that works as a 'gateway' to
> EJB-applications? Or how would I realize an integration into existing
> EJB-based systems that use anycommercial container.
I don't know the specifics (as I said not an EJB guy really) but I believe
weblogic offers the ability to enter "T3 startup classes" that can be mapped
into JNDI space somehow. (No idea what that means though). There is at least
one group I know of who use parts of Avalon/Phoenix and James in this way. I
don't know the specifics or even if it is a good solution.
Hopefully when the Services JSR actually starts Avalon will also offer
services using its API and thus be able to be integrated into any arbitrary
EJB container or whatever.
> Am I right that Phoenix (or the Component look up mechanism at all) is
> using an rmiRegistry for lookup?
nope ;)
Some blocks *may* be registered with rmi registry if you use JMX manager and
use RMI agent for JMX manager ... but there is nothing that requires it.
> Actually I am more interested in JMS than in EJB. How does JMS match with
> Avalon?
JMS could be integrated with Avalon and work well but isn't at the moment. I
see JMS as no different from other resources (ie see SocketManager, or
ConnectionManager).
> Does it make sense to use both in an integrated way? JMS seems to
> have a potential for scalable distributed (server-)applications.
yup.
>But JMS
> uses JNDI for lookup. And when do I use JMS and when Avalon to do a
> lookup/kommunication?
I would implement a MessagingManager interface that did all the JNDI magic
behind it and just gave you basic access to topics/queues/sessions/whatevers
via a simple interface.
>Maybe there might be an interface a block can
> implement that makes tha block able to send and consume messages?
Probably like ConnectionHandler (consumer of connections) in the
ConnectionManager setup?
Cheers,
Pete
*-----------------------------------------------------*
| "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, |
| and proving that there is no need to do so - almost |
| everyone gets busy on the proof." |
| - John Kenneth Galbraith |
*-----------------------------------------------------*
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
