While working on the IIOP module, I have used an "IIOP server
configuration" that turns IIOP into the default.
Let me put it more clearly: by default, EJBs are deployed in a
JRMP container. If I want an EJB to be deployed in an IIOP container,
I must add to its jboss.xml file an element like
<configuration-name>IIOP Stateless SessionBean</configuration-name>
To avoid doing this for many EJBs, I created a special server
configuration. This configuration has a modified standardjboss.xml,
in which IIOP container configurations have "standard"
container-names: "Standard Stateless SessionBean", and so on.
JRMP container configurations have "non-standard" container-names:
"JRMP Stateless SessionBean", and so on.
This simple trick spared me the trouble of having almost identical
EJB jars (the only difference being a configuration-name element in
jboss.xml) to deploy in JRMP and in IIOP containers. If I start JBoss
with plain 'run.sh', my EJBs are deployed in a JRMP container. If I
start it with 'run.sh -c=iiop', the same EJBs are deployed in an IIOP
container.
I was wondering if this setting would be useful for others, then had
an idea... Wouldn't it be nice to have both configurations active at
once? I mean: if one could have two different deploy directories
simultaneously handled by the server, by saying something like
run.sh -c default -c iiop
Want your EJB deployed in a JRMP container? Drop it in default/deploy...
Want it deployed in an IIOP container? Drop it in iiop/deploy...
Of course, the configuration-name entry in the EJB's jboss.xml (if
present) would still override the server configuration.
Am I too far off? Does this make any sense? Would this idea be
useful for other (JBoss.net) containers?
Best,
Francisco
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
