Put your orion-ejb-jar.xml into your application/orion 
directory  (app/META-INF starting in 1.4.8); it'll be copied, missing 
fields added, and put into the application-deployments/app version.  The 
application-deployments/app version goes away on redeployment.

This has been brought up a number of times before; try searching the list 
archives (at http://www.mail-archive.com/orion-interest%40orionserver.com/ 
; they were down when I just checked) for orion-ejb-jar .

Kirk Yarina

At 10:38 AM 4/26/01 +0100, you wrote:
>Sending this again, as my last post did not seem to appear.  Sorry if 
>you've got it already.
>
>Hi All,
>
>I am trying to do an import of around 90,000 articles which involves 
>creating 3 EJB's per article.  The server gets to around 6000 articles, 
>then falls over giving me an OutOfMemory error.  Reading the list, it 
>seems related to Orion's inablity to passivate EJB's.
>
>I'm using 1.4.8, with JDK 1.3 on Win2000.
>
>I have recently read postings instructing on how to use the max-instances 
>parameter in orion-ejb-jar.xml.  I have tried this, but when I re-deploy, 
>and take a look at the newly generated file, it never keeps my additions, 
>and the problem still occurs during imports.
>
><entity-deployment name="com.backend.contentflow.ejb.User" 
>location="com.backend.contentflow.ejb.User" 
>wrapper="UserHome_EntityHomeWrapper16" 
>table="com_backend_contentflow_ejb_User" data-source="jdbc/HypersonicDS" 
>max-instances="100">
>
>Am I putting this attribute in the right place?  Shouldn't I find it still 
>there when I look at the newly generated orion-ejb-jar.xml?  There are no 
>problems editing it to change SQL for finder methods, so why does it drop 
>my changes to the entity references?
>
>I have also tried writing a method in the bean which calls ejbPassivate, 
>and calling that from the import code to force passivation when I'm done 
>importing an article?  It doesn't seem to help (I'm probably showing my 
>ignorance here)
>
>Is there a known way to force passivation other than this?
>
>Much appreciated,
>
>James


Reply via email to