I haven't used it either. Our app has a service layer (independant of MINA) and a network layer (based on MINA obviously). When I want to test service layer, I don't need MINA at all. And when I want to test the network layer, I prefer to use the real stuff (ie using real sockets).
Maarten On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 10:49 PM, Mark Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have never used it. I could see it having a utility for unit > testing, but that is it. > > > On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 11:05 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> peter royal wrote: >>> >>> On Nov 6, 2008, at 7:28 AM, Dan Creswell wrote: >>>> >>>> Hmmm, if VmPipe is done right it should allow me to build an app/service >>>> on >>>> top of MINA that can easily be tested all inside of a single JVM (good >>>> for >>>> unit testing amongst other things) or deployed fully networked with >>>> minimum >>>> code disruption. >>>> >>>> Is it intended to be used in such a fashion? If not possibly it can be >>>> dropped. >>> >>> I am using it for exactly this purpose. >>> >>> We have two services that can either be deployed as separate VMs, or >>> inside of the same VM. WHen its inside the same VM, we cull out the protocol >>> filters and just use a VmPipe. Minimal code disruption to support both >>> configurations. >> >> Interesting. Edouard's proposal then makes sense : implementing the >> underlying communication using Queues and removing a lot of the current code >> could help. >> >> You will still have the same API (IoAcceptor/IoConnector), and won't be >> disruptive. >> >> This has to be evaluated. >> >> >> -- >> -- >> cordialement, regards, >> Emmanuel Lécharny >> www.iktek.com >> directory.apache.org >> >> >> >
