Hi,
Both of you gives me a clever answer for a stupid question ;)
What I only wanted to point out, it is that specifying in ejb-jar.xml:
<acknowledge-mode>AUTO_ACKNOWELDGE</acknowledge-mode>
is not correct.
It should be
<acknowledge-mode>Auto-acknowlede</acknowledge-mode>
- and not _
AUTO_ACKNOWLEDGE is when doing JMS
Auto-acknowlede is when deploying MDB
I understand (now) that JBossMQ does not care of the value, but the docu
should give
the correct definition.
Regards.
VIncent.
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]De la part de
> Hiram Chirino
> Envoyé : mardi 29 mai 2001 1:45
> À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Objet : Re: [JBoss-dev] MDB Auto-_-_Acknowledge
>
>
> I totally agree with peter. If the container takes the
> "Dups-ok-acknowledge" setting and implements it just like the
> "Auto-acknowledge" setting, the container's contract with the client would
> still be vaild.
>
> Regards,
> Hiram
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Peter Antman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 3:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] MDB Auto-_-_Acknowledge
>
>
> > On 28 Maj, Vincent Harcq wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > After implementing MDB in ejbdoclet, one of the developer find out
> > > that jboss does not follow the spec for <acknowledge-mode> on MDB.
> > > Page 462:
> > > <!--
> > > The acknowledge-mode element specifies whether JMS AUTO_ACKNOWLEDGE
> > > or DUPS_OK_ACKNOWLEDGE message acknowledgment semantics should be
> > > used for the onMessage message of a message-driven bean that uses bean
> > > managed transaction demarcation.
> > > The acknowledge-mode element must be one of the two following:
> > > <acknowledge-mode>Auto-acknowledge</acknowledge-mode>
> > > <acknowledge-mode>Dups-ok-acknowledge</acknowledgemode>
> > > Used in: message-driven
> > > -->
> > >
> > > So - for MDB and _ for JMS
> > >
> > > Stupidity of the spec maybe, but we need to change jboss to have full
> > > compliance. I can commit the change and I propose to keep both
> > > possibilities for safety.
> > >
> >
> > Well, I don't think it is that easy. First we had support for it. Then
> > Hiram added support for XA transactions in JBossMQ and added support for
> > that in the MDB container, but broke support for ACK modes. We had some
> > arguing about this, and finally decided that we did not need to support
> > DUPS_OK_ACKNOWLEDGE.
> >
> > Was this bad or god? Well, I would interpret it this way.
> >
> > 1. With bean managed transaction we support AUTO_ACKNOWLEDGE semantics,
> > i.e every message is automtically acked. Yes, we are doing it with a
> > transacted session, but that is an implementation question and
> > nothing else (who cares that non XA transactions in JBossMQ is
> > actually managed with single commit XA transactions under the hood?
> >
> > 2. DUP_OK. To my knowledge this is a flag that the JMS provider MAY
> > obay (i.e it is completly up to the JMS provider how to implement
> > support for this - it may even be done as AUTO_ACKNOWLEDGE). What it
> > says is that if it is used ,the client have to be aware that there
> > may be some resent messages.
> >
> > Therefore I would say that the MDB container is spec compliant. You may
> > specify AUTO_ACKNOWLEDGE or DUP_OK in the deployment descriptor, but the
> > implementation does not care (which in my view probably is not a breach
> > with the spec). If it is possible to show that DUPS_OK if used could
> > lead to dramatic increase in performance, that would be another
> > question.
> >
> > That to say, if you are able enough to reimplement support for DUPS_PK
> > without braking anything, please go ahead.
> >
> > file://Peter
> >
> > > Vincent.
> > >
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
