Bill,
Thanks for the help.
I think what will probably happen is that we write several implementations of
our HttpSession object, with varying features and cost. Then the user will be
able to pay as they go - i.e. only take on the performance hit associated with
the particular feature set that they require.
I was thinking of a CMP bean as an initial naive and exploratory implementation
- I agree it would not be fast, but it would be simple and persistant.
I've had a very quick look at your stuff and it looks interesting. It didn't
look like it did persistance, but then many people may wish to avoid that
overhead. There might well be room for an HttpSession object built on
technology like this.
When things get a little further I'll come back to you and we'll talk some
more. I'd like to get a really simple implementation out of the door so that I
understand the problem fully before I really launch into the ultimate solution.
Thanks for your mail,
Jules
Bill Burke wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> > Julian Gosnell
> > Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 7:18 AM
> > To: marc fleury
> > Cc: Greg Wilkins; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: [JBoss-dev] JBoss 3.0 and Jetty
> >
> >
> > Marc,
> >
> > I'm trying to gauge requirements for Jetty within a
> > JBoss-3 context.
> >
> > This is what I have figured so far:
> >
> > 1. JettyService needs to be delivered as a self
> > contained SAR. So it can be hot-deployed onto a JBoss
> > node. My major concern here is whether the SAR is run
> > packed/unpacked. Unpacked is probably not much work.
> > Packed will probably require changes to Jetty itself
> > (need to investigate).
> >
> > 2. Clustered Session support - if an incoming http
> > request can be routed to any one of a number of nodes,
> > then HttpSession objects need to be transparently
> > distributed, in order that conversational state may be
> > maintained between client and webapp. I was thinking
> > that the simplest HttpSession implementation might be
> > a CMP Bean ? Is this how clustering is expected to
> > work in 3.0? Is this the sort of approach that you
> > would expect ?
> >
>
> Julian, take a look at http://www.javagroups.com especially the
> DistributedHashtable. Putting the HttpSession in a CMP Bean is a bad idea.
> You don't want to be hitting the database on every click to your site. When
> Sacha and I get the HA SFSBs going, I was thinking of making the HttpSession
> a SFSB. Just an idea though.
>
> Regards,
>
> Bill
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
