On Wed, 8 Aug 2001 17:38, Michael Bachran wrote:
> What about a locking mechanism in Avalon? Can it be imlemented based of an
> object pool?
> Or is there already one?
Not sure what you mean exactly ;)
Avalon/Excalibur has a Component pool and has separate locks (in concurrent
package) but I don't think thats what you are getting at?
> > 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 JSR? What's that about?
Basically an effort to standardize an API like Avalon/Phoenix and brand it as
part of J2EE.
> > > 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).
>
> So you don't see the neccessity to use it?
In certain cases it would be great and less so in other cases ... I guess I
can't see much difference between it JDBC, vanilla sockets, etc in
terms of "necessity".
> > 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.
>
> What about combining the MessagingManager interface with a
> JNDIComponentManager (as Jeffs mentioned)?
That could work ;)
>
> > >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?
>
> Hmmm... Yes! Maybe a 'DefaultMessagingManager' might become member of a
> component that wants to communicate through the MessagingManager Iterface.
> I am not sure about the seperation. Maybe I need a JMSConnectionHandler.
> Maybe I want two seperate iterfaces for sending and consuming. I don't know
> jet.
me neither - I think the only way to find out would be to experiment and see
what works ;)
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]
