This is already the case, Jason. Invokers are configured as an MBean. standardjboss.xml binds the ProxyFactory to the container. Implicitly, a default invoker is bound to the container. You can bind your own invoker to the container by specifying <home-invoker> or <bean-invoker> with an MBean name in jboss.xml.
In the future we'll need to expand things so that you can bind multiple invokers to the same container via standardjboss.xml and jboss.xml. Bill. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jason > Dillon > Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 4:40 PM > To: Francisco Reverbel > Cc: marc fleury; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Multiple server configurations > > > Perhaps the invoker configuration should be seperate and parrallel to > the container configuration? > > --jason > > > Francisco Reverbel wrote: > > >Hi Marc, > > > >On Wed, 20 Mar 2002, marc fleury wrote: > > > >>we already support the multiple configuration thing by passing > the directory > >>as an argument > >> > > > >Yes, but you can specify only one configuration at a time. > > > >>run jetty runs with the jetty configuration > >>run tomcat runs with the tomcat conf > >> > >>what we change are the jboss.jcml (in 2.4) and the > standardjboss.xml, this > >>is what they are they for (congrats on finding it out :) > >> > > > >That was not really hard... :-) > > > >>That being said I never thought of the "mixed mode" where you > need IIOP and > >>JRMP, making the invocation layer the root of the configuration > sounds a bit > >>odd at this point (but we never know). I say let people use > this stuff if > >>they come back with a request that looks vaguely like your idea then we > >>could probably think about the mixed mode. > >> > > > >I fully agree. Please see my earlier reply to Jason. > > > >Just want to make it clear that we already have a "mixed mode" in some > >sense. Right now you can deploy an EJB jar into an JRMP container and > >another one into an IIOP container. Both at the same time and on the > >same running server. > > > >But the EJB jars must be different, of course! > > > >At least one of them must have something that says: > > > > "rather than deploying me into a container of the default > kind, deploy me > > into a container of kind X". > > > >My idea would buy us just one thing: _the_same_ EJB jar file could be > >deployed into different containers within the same running server. > > > >Best, > > > >Francisco > > > >>Again, switching mode is done at the command prompt already > >> > >>marcf > >> > >>|-----Original Message----- > >>|From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>|[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > >>|Francisco Reverbel > >>|Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 3:10 PM > >>|To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>|Subject: [JBoss-dev] Multiple server configurations > >>| > >>| > >>|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 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
