Re: Implementing Global JNDI
Hi David, Few days back i had attached a implementation to JIRA-2153. Would be glad if u can provide ur review comments for the same. Regards Krishnakumar On 7/18/06, Krishnakumar B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi David, I have updated the JIRA-2153 with Context implementation and GBean that binds to JNDI. Kindly provide ur comments. Regards Krish On 7/6/06, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: See my comment in the jira about this, I don't think you need to use any naming References at all, nor do you need anything but a GBean reference to the appropriate GBean. http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2153 thanks david jencks On Jul 6, 2006, at 6:06 AM, Krishnakumar B wrote: Hi David, I tried this and it works for Custom Resource Adapters. There is still a problem for Registering GBeans in Global JNDI through the builder ( ServiceConfigBuilder ). The Builder is a part of geronimo-gbean-deployer plan which is parent of j2ee-deployer. The geronimo-naming jars are loaded in j2ee-deployer. Hence we dont get access in ServiceConfigBuilder to GBeanReference thats part of naming. Currently all the binding GBeans are in naming package. So it works for all j2ee deployments. Is there a way to work around this ClassLoading problem heirarchy for binding GBeans through builder? Regards Krishnakumar On 6/28/06, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think there is a simpler solution, or perhaps I don't understand all the details of what you are proposing. I think if you give your binding gbeans the magic classLoader attribute everything will work. This will be set to the configuration classloader for the configuration the gbean is in, not the configuration the gbeans class is loaded in. This classloader should always have the necessary classes in it. thanks david jencks On Jun 28, 2006, at 12:39 AM, Manu George wrote: Hi, The problem we are facing regarding adapters is because the binding gbeans were added to the naming module of geronimo. We are planning to change this by creating a separate module for global jndi and then adding it as a dependency in the configuration that is getting deployed. This will be done in the builders. All the reference creation logic can also be moved to the gbeans.The Binding GBeans will then have access to application level classes as they will be loaded in the app class loader. We hope this approach will solve the current problem. We will post the code again after making these changes. Thanks Manu On 6/28/06, Krishnakumar B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, We have created a JIRA (http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2153 ) and attached the initial draft. We have tried two approaches. * Adding to plan * Deploying from Builder. The EJBJNDIBindingGBean deploys from OpenEJBModuleBuilder and has a tag global-jndi/ in opene ejb plan. Resource Adapter and GBean have a gbean plan added to deployment plan. gbean name=JMSQueueFactoryJNDIBindingGBean class=org.apache.geronimo.connector.jndi.ConnectorJNDIBindingGBean attribute name=configIdtest/jms.rar/1.0/rar/attribute attribute name=jndiNameglobalJMSQueueFactory/attribute attribute name=componentNameJMSQueueFactory/attribute attribute name=j2eeTypeJCAManagedConnectionFactory/attribute attribute name=interfaceNameorg.apache.geronimo.jms.connector.JMSQueueConnec tionFactory/attribute /gbean and gbean name=TestGBeanJNDIBindingGBean class=org.apache.geronimo.service.jndi.ServiceJNDIBindingGBean attribute name=configIdtest/gbean/1.0/car/attribute attribute name=jndiNameglobalTestGBean/attribute attribute name=componentNameTestGBean/attribute attribute name=j2eeTypeGBean/attribute attribute name=classNamegbean.test.TestGBean/attribute /gbean We have a Classloading issue when trying to maintain all the BindingGbeans at one level. ( rmi-naming ). For GBeans and Resource Adapters that are not J2EE interfaces like javax.sql.DataSource / javax.jms.QueueConnectionFactory we get a ClassNotFound as the class is not available at Classloader of rmi-naming. We spent a lot of time trying to solve this issue but are not able to find a solution as the application level interface or class is not available. This problem will not occur for j2ee interfaces like DataSource, EJB interfaces, Queue, Topic etc.. If the approach is correct we would like to add the other features to make this more suitable for adding into the product. Regards Krishnakumar B On 6/26/06, Jacek Laskowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/23/06, Krishnakumar B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The plan needs to have some XML Tag to say this resource needs to gets into Global JNDI and the builder can then add it to geronimo: Context.
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
Hi David, I have updated the JIRA-2153 with Context implementation and GBean that binds to JNDI. Kindly provide ur comments. Regards Krish On 7/6/06, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: See my comment in the jira about this, I don't think you need to use any naming References at all, nor do you need anything but a GBean reference to the appropriate GBean. http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2153 thanks david jencks On Jul 6, 2006, at 6:06 AM, Krishnakumar B wrote: Hi David, I tried this and it works for Custom Resource Adapters. There is still a problem for Registering GBeans in Global JNDI through the builder ( ServiceConfigBuilder ). The Builder is a part of geronimo-gbean-deployer plan which is parent of j2ee-deployer. The geronimo-naming jars are loaded in j2ee-deployer. Hence we dont get access in ServiceConfigBuilder to GBeanReference thats part of naming. Currently all the binding GBeans are in naming package. So it works for all j2ee deployments. Is there a way to work around this ClassLoading problem heirarchy for binding GBeans through builder? Regards Krishnakumar On 6/28/06, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think there is a simpler solution, or perhaps I don't understand all the details of what you are proposing. I think if you give your binding gbeans the magic classLoader attribute everything will work. This will be set to the configuration classloader for the configuration the gbean is in, not the configuration the gbeans class is loaded in. This classloader should always have the necessary classes in it. thanks david jencks On Jun 28, 2006, at 12:39 AM, Manu George wrote: Hi, The problem we are facing regarding adapters is because the binding gbeans were added to the naming module of geronimo. We are planning to change this by creating a separate module for global jndi and then adding it as a dependency in the configuration that is getting deployed. This will be done in the builders. All the reference creation logic can also be moved to the gbeans.The Binding GBeans will then have access to application level classes as they will be loaded in the app class loader. We hope this approach will solve the current problem. We will post the code again after making these changes. Thanks Manu On 6/28/06, Krishnakumar B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, We have created a JIRA (http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2153 ) and attached the initial draft. We have tried two approaches. * Adding to plan * Deploying from Builder. The EJBJNDIBindingGBean deploys from OpenEJBModuleBuilder and has a tag global-jndi/ in opene ejb plan. Resource Adapter and GBean have a gbean plan added to deployment plan. gbean name=JMSQueueFactoryJNDIBindingGBean class=org.apache.geronimo.connector.jndi.ConnectorJNDIBindingGBean attribute name=configIdtest/jms.rar/1.0/rar/attribute attribute name=jndiNameglobalJMSQueueFactory/attribute attribute name=componentNameJMSQueueFactory/attribute attribute name=j2eeTypeJCAManagedConnectionFactory/attribute attribute name=interfaceNameorg.apache.geronimo.jms.connector.JMSQueueConnec tionFactory/attribute /gbean and gbean name=TestGBeanJNDIBindingGBean class=org.apache.geronimo.service.jndi.ServiceJNDIBindingGBean attribute name=configIdtest/gbean/1.0/car/attribute attribute name=jndiNameglobalTestGBean/attribute attribute name=componentNameTestGBean/attribute attribute name=j2eeTypeGBean/attribute attribute name=classNamegbean.test.TestGBean/attribute /gbean We have a Classloading issue when trying to maintain all the BindingGbeans at one level. ( rmi-naming ). For GBeans and Resource Adapters that are not J2EE interfaces like javax.sql.DataSource / javax.jms.QueueConnectionFactory we get a ClassNotFound as the class is not available at Classloader of rmi-naming. We spent a lot of time trying to solve this issue but are not able to find a solution as the application level interface or class is not available. This problem will not occur for j2ee interfaces like DataSource, EJB interfaces, Queue, Topic etc.. If the approach is correct we would like to add the other features to make this more suitable for adding into the product. Regards Krishnakumar B On 6/26/06, Jacek Laskowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/23/06, Krishnakumar B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The plan needs to have some XML Tag to say this resource needs to gets into Global JNDI and the builder can then add it to geronimo: Context. This is not implemented yet. Currently if we deploy a connector it gets in global jndi. I might've misunderstood it, but isn't Global JNDI == geronimo: context == global: context? If so, why is this copying from Global JNDI to the geronimo: namespace? Looking forward to seeing your patch for it. Just as Guillaume
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
Hi David, I tried this and it works for Custom Resource Adapters. There is still a problem for Registering GBeans in Global JNDI through the builder ( ServiceConfigBuilder ). The Builder is a part of geronimo-gbean-deployer plan which is parent of j2ee-deployer. The geronimo-naming jars are loaded in j2ee-deployer. Hence we dont get access in ServiceConfigBuilder to GBeanReference thats part of naming. Currently all the binding GBeans are in naming package. So it works for all j2ee deployments. Is there a way to work around this ClassLoading problem heirarchy for binding GBeans through builder? Regards Krishnakumar On 6/28/06, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think there is a simpler solution, or perhaps I don't understand all the details of what you are proposing. I think if you give your binding gbeans the magic classLoader attribute everything will work. This will be set to the configuration classloader for the configuration the gbean is in, not the configuration the gbeans class is loaded in. This classloader should always have the necessary classes in it. thanks david jencks On Jun 28, 2006, at 12:39 AM, Manu George wrote: Hi, The problem we are facing regarding adapters is because the binding gbeans were added to the naming module of geronimo. We are planning to change this by creating a separate module for global jndi and then adding it as a dependency in the configuration that is getting deployed. This will be done in the builders. All the reference creation logic can also be moved to the gbeans.The Binding GBeans will then have access to application level classes as they will be loaded in the app class loader. We hope this approach will solve the current problem. We will post the code again after making these changes. Thanks Manu On 6/28/06, Krishnakumar B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, We have created a JIRA (http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2153 ) and attached the initial draft. We have tried two approaches. * Adding to plan * Deploying from Builder. The EJBJNDIBindingGBean deploys from OpenEJBModuleBuilder and has a tag global-jndi/ in opene ejb plan. Resource Adapter and GBean have a gbean plan added to deployment plan. gbean name=JMSQueueFactoryJNDIBindingGBean class=org.apache.geronimo.connector.jndi.ConnectorJNDIBindingGBean attribute name=configIdtest/jms.rar/1.0/rar/attribute attribute name=jndiNameglobalJMSQueueFactory/attribute attribute name=componentNameJMSQueueFactory/attribute attribute name=j2eeTypeJCAManagedConnectionFactory/attribute attribute name=interfaceNameorg.apache.geronimo.jms.connector.JMSQueueConnectionFactory/attribute /gbean and gbean name=TestGBeanJNDIBindingGBean class=org.apache.geronimo.service.jndi.ServiceJNDIBindingGBean attribute name=configIdtest/gbean/1.0/car/attribute attribute name=jndiNameglobalTestGBean/attribute attribute name=componentNameTestGBean/attribute attribute name=j2eeTypeGBean/attribute attribute name=classNamegbean.test.TestGBean/attribute /gbean We have a Classloading issue when trying to maintain all the BindingGbeans at one level. ( rmi-naming ). For GBeans and Resource Adapters that are not J2EE interfaces like javax.sql.DataSource / javax.jms.QueueConnectionFactory we get a ClassNotFound as the class is not available at Classloader of rmi-naming. We spent a lot of time trying to solve this issue but are not able to find a solution as the application level interface or class is not available. This problem will not occur for j2ee interfaces like DataSource, EJB interfaces, Queue, Topic etc.. If the approach is correct we would like to add the other features to make this more suitable for adding into the product. Regards Krishnakumar B On 6/26/06, Jacek Laskowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/23/06, Krishnakumar B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The plan needs to have some XML Tag to say this resource needs to gets into Global JNDI and the builder can then add it to geronimo: Context. This is not implemented yet. Currently if we deploy a connector it gets in global jndi. I might've misunderstood it, but isn't Global JNDI == geronimo: context == global: context? If so, why is this copying from Global JNDI to the geronimo: namespace? Looking forward to seeing your patch for it. Just as Guillaume suggested, please create an JIRA issue and attach the patch to it. Krishnakumar B Jacek -- Jacek Laskowski http://www.laskowski.net.pl
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
See my comment in the jira about this, I don't think you need to use any naming References at all, nor do you need anything but a GBean reference to the appropriate GBean. http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2153 thanks david jencks On Jul 6, 2006, at 6:06 AM, Krishnakumar B wrote: Hi David, I tried this and it works for Custom Resource Adapters. There is still a problem for Registering GBeans in Global JNDI through the builder ( ServiceConfigBuilder ). The Builder is a part of geronimo-gbean-deployer plan which is parent of j2ee-deployer. The geronimo-naming jars are loaded in j2ee-deployer. Hence we dont get access in ServiceConfigBuilder to GBeanReference thats part of naming. Currently all the binding GBeans are in naming package. So it works for all j2ee deployments. Is there a way to work around this ClassLoading problem heirarchy for binding GBeans through builder? Regards Krishnakumar On 6/28/06, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think there is a simpler solution, or perhaps I don't understand all the details of what you are proposing. I think if you give your binding gbeans the magic classLoader attribute everything will work. This will be set to the configuration classloader for the configuration the gbean is in, not the configuration the gbeans class is loaded in. This classloader should always have the necessary classes in it. thanks david jencks On Jun 28, 2006, at 12:39 AM, Manu George wrote: Hi, The problem we are facing regarding adapters is because the binding gbeans were added to the naming module of geronimo. We are planning to change this by creating a separate module for global jndi and then adding it as a dependency in the configuration that is getting deployed. This will be done in the builders. All the reference creation logic can also be moved to the gbeans.The Binding GBeans will then have access to application level classes as they will be loaded in the app class loader. We hope this approach will solve the current problem. We will post the code again after making these changes. Thanks Manu On 6/28/06, Krishnakumar B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, We have created a JIRA (http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2153 ) and attached the initial draft. We have tried two approaches. * Adding to plan * Deploying from Builder. The EJBJNDIBindingGBean deploys from OpenEJBModuleBuilder and has a tag global-jndi/ in opene ejb plan. Resource Adapter and GBean have a gbean plan added to deployment plan. gbean name=JMSQueueFactoryJNDIBindingGBean class=org.apache.geronimo.connector.jndi.ConnectorJNDIBindingGBean attribute name=configIdtest/jms.rar/1.0/rar/attribute attribute name=jndiNameglobalJMSQueueFactory/attribute attribute name=componentNameJMSQueueFactory/attribute attribute name=j2eeTypeJCAManagedConnectionFactory/attribute attribute name=interfaceNameorg.apache.geronimo.jms.connector.JMSQueueConnec tionFactory/attribute /gbean and gbean name=TestGBeanJNDIBindingGBean class=org.apache.geronimo.service.jndi.ServiceJNDIBindingGBean attribute name=configIdtest/gbean/1.0/car/attribute attribute name=jndiNameglobalTestGBean/attribute attribute name=componentNameTestGBean/attribute attribute name=j2eeTypeGBean/attribute attribute name=classNamegbean.test.TestGBean/attribute /gbean We have a Classloading issue when trying to maintain all the BindingGbeans at one level. ( rmi-naming ). For GBeans and Resource Adapters that are not J2EE interfaces like javax.sql.DataSource / javax.jms.QueueConnectionFactory we get a ClassNotFound as the class is not available at Classloader of rmi-naming. We spent a lot of time trying to solve this issue but are not able to find a solution as the application level interface or class is not available. This problem will not occur for j2ee interfaces like DataSource, EJB interfaces, Queue, Topic etc.. If the approach is correct we would like to add the other features to make this more suitable for adding into the product. Regards Krishnakumar B On 6/26/06, Jacek Laskowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/23/06, Krishnakumar B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The plan needs to have some XML Tag to say this resource needs to gets into Global JNDI and the builder can then add it to geronimo: Context. This is not implemented yet. Currently if we deploy a connector it gets in global jndi. I might've misunderstood it, but isn't Global JNDI == geronimo: context == global: context? If so, why is this copying from Global JNDI to the geronimo: namespace? Looking forward to seeing your patch for it. Just as Guillaume suggested, please create an JIRA issue and attach the patch to it. Krishnakumar B Jacek -- Jacek Laskowski http://www.laskowski.net.pl
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
Hi, We have created a JIRA (http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2153 ) and attached the initial draft. We have tried two approaches. * Adding to plan * Deploying from Builder. The EJBJNDIBindingGBean deploys from OpenEJBModuleBuilder and has a tag global-jndi/ in opene ejb plan. Resource Adapter and GBean have a gbean plan added to deployment plan. gbean name=JMSQueueFactoryJNDIBindingGBean class=org.apache.geronimo.connector.jndi.ConnectorJNDIBindingGBean attribute name=configIdtest/jms.rar/1.0/rar/attribute attribute name=jndiNameglobalJMSQueueFactory/attribute attribute name=componentNameJMSQueueFactory/attribute attribute name=j2eeTypeJCAManagedConnectionFactory/attribute attribute name=interfaceNameorg.apache.geronimo.jms.connector.JMSQueueConnectionFactory/attribute /gbean and gbean name=TestGBeanJNDIBindingGBean class=org.apache.geronimo.service.jndi.ServiceJNDIBindingGBean attribute name=configIdtest/gbean/1.0/car/attribute attribute name=jndiNameglobalTestGBean/attribute attribute name=componentNameTestGBean/attribute attribute name=j2eeTypeGBean/attribute attribute name=classNamegbean.test.TestGBean/attribute /gbean We have a Classloading issue when trying to maintain all the BindingGbeans at one level. ( rmi-naming ). For GBeans and Resource Adapters that are not J2EE interfaces like javax.sql.DataSource / javax.jms.QueueConnectionFactory we get a ClassNotFound as the class is not available at Classloader of rmi-naming. We spent a lot of time trying to solve this issue but are not able to find a solution as the application level interface or class is not available. This problem will not occur for j2ee interfaces like DataSource, EJB interfaces, Queue, Topic etc.. If the approach is correct we would like to add the other features to make this more suitable for adding into the product. Regards Krishnakumar B On 6/26/06, Jacek Laskowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/23/06, Krishnakumar B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The plan needs to have some XML Tag to say this resource needs to gets into Global JNDI and the builder can then add it to geronimo: Context. This is not implemented yet. Currently if we deploy a connector it gets in global jndi. I might've misunderstood it, but isn't Global JNDI == geronimo: context == global: context? If so, why is this copying from Global JNDI to the geronimo: namespace? Looking forward to seeing your patch for it. Just as Guillaume suggested, please create an JIRA issue and attach the patch to it. Krishnakumar B Jacek -- Jacek Laskowski http://www.laskowski.net.pl
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
Hi, The problem we are facing regarding adapters is because the binding gbeans were added to the naming module of geronimo. We are planning to change this by creating a separate module for global jndi and then adding it as a dependency in the configuration that is getting deployed. This will be done in the builders. All the reference creation logic can also be moved to the gbeans.The Binding GBeans will then have access to application level classes as they will be loaded in the app class loader. We hope this approach will solve the current problem. We will post the code again after making these changes. Thanks ManuOn 6/28/06, Krishnakumar B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi,We have createda JIRA(http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2153) and attachedthe initial draft. We have tried two approaches. * Adding to plan* Deploying from Builder.The EJBJNDIBindingGBean deploys from OpenEJBModuleBuilder and has a tagglobal-jndi/ in opene ejb plan.Resource Adapter and GBean have a gbean plan added to deployment plan. gbean name=JMSQueueFactoryJNDIBindingGBeanclass=org.apache.geronimo.connector.jndi.ConnectorJNDIBindingGBeanattribute name=configIdtest/jms.rar/1.0/rar/attribute attribute name=jndiNameglobalJMSQueueFactory/attributeattribute name=componentNameJMSQueueFactory/attributeattribute name=j2eeTypeJCAManagedConnectionFactory/attribute attribute name=interfaceNameorg.apache.geronimo.jms.connector.JMSQueueConnectionFactory/attribute/gbeanandgbean name=TestGBeanJNDIBindingGBean class=org.apache.geronimo.service.jndi.ServiceJNDIBindingGBeanattribute name=configIdtest/gbean/1.0/car/attributeattribute name=jndiNameglobalTestGBean/attribute attribute name=componentNameTestGBean/attributeattribute name=j2eeTypeGBean/attributeattribute name=classNamegbean.test.TestGBean/attribute /gbeanWe have a Classloading issue when trying to maintain all theBindingGbeans at one level. ( rmi-naming ). For GBeans and ResourceAdapters that are not J2EE interfaces like javax.sql.DataSource /javax.jms.QueueConnectionFactory we get a ClassNotFound as the classis not available at Classloader of rmi-naming.We spent a lot of time trying to solve this issue but are not able tofind a solution as the application level interface or class is not available. This problem will not occur for j2ee interfaces likeDataSource, EJB interfaces, Queue, Topic etc..If the approach is correct we would like to add the other features tomake this more suitable for adding into the product. RegardsKrishnakumar BOn 6/26/06, Jacek Laskowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/23/06, Krishnakumar B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The plan needs to have some XML Tag to say this resource needs to gets into Global JNDI and the builder can then add it to geronimo: Context. This is not implemented yet. Currently if we deploy a connector it gets in global jndi. I might've misunderstood it, but isn't Global JNDI == geronimo: context == global: context? If so, why is this copying from Global JNDI to the geronimo: namespace? Looking forward to seeing your patch for it. Just as Guillaume suggested, please create an JIRA issue and attach the patch to it. Krishnakumar B Jacek -- Jacek Laskowski http://www.laskowski.net.pl
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
I think there is a simpler solution, or perhaps I don't understand all the details of what you are proposing. I think if you give your binding gbeans the magic classLoader attribute everything will work. This will be set to the configuration classloader for the configuration the gbean is in, not the configuration the gbeans class is loaded in. This classloader should always have the necessary classes in it.thanksdavid jencksOn Jun 28, 2006, at 12:39 AM, Manu George wrote:Hi, The problem we are facing regarding adapters is because the binding gbeans were added to the naming module of geronimo. We are planning to change this by creating a separate module for global jndi and then adding it as a dependency in the configuration that is getting deployed. This will be done in the builders. All the reference creation logic can also be moved to the gbeans.The Binding GBeans will then have access to application level classes as they will be loaded in the app class loader. We hope this approach will solve the current problem. We will post the code again after making these changes. Thanks ManuOn 6/28/06, Krishnakumar B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi,We have created a JIRA(http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2153 ) and attachedthe initial draft. We have tried two approaches. * Adding to plan* Deploying from Builder.The EJBJNDIBindingGBean deploys from OpenEJBModuleBuilder and has a tag global-jndi/ in opene ejb plan.Resource Adapter and GBean have a gbean plan added to deployment plan. gbean name="JMSQueueFactoryJNDIBindingGBean"class="org.apache.geronimo.connector.jndi.ConnectorJNDIBindingGBean"attribute name="configId"test/jms.rar/1.0/rar/attribute attribute name="jndiName"globalJMSQueueFactory/attributeattribute name="componentName"JMSQueueFactory/attributeattribute name="j2eeType"JCAManagedConnectionFactory/attribute attribute name="interfaceName"org.apache.geronimo.jms.connector.JMSQueueConnectionFactory/attribute/gbeanandgbean name="TestGBeanJNDIBindingGBean" class="org.apache.geronimo.service.jndi.ServiceJNDIBindingGBean"attribute name="configId"test/gbean/1.0/car/attributeattribute name="jndiName"globalTestGBean/attribute attribute name="componentName"TestGBean/attributeattribute name="j2eeType"GBean/attributeattribute name="className"gbean.test.TestGBean/attribute /gbeanWe have a Classloading issue when trying to maintain all theBindingGbeans at one level. ( rmi-naming ). For GBeans and ResourceAdapters that are not J2EE interfaces like javax.sql.DataSource /javax.jms.QueueConnectionFactory we get a ClassNotFound as the classis not available at Classloader of rmi-naming.We spent a lot of time trying to solve this issue but are not able tofind a solution as the application level interface or class is not available. This problem will not occur for j2ee interfaces likeDataSource, EJB interfaces, Queue, Topic etc..If the approach is correct we would like to add the other features tomake this more suitable for adding into the product. RegardsKrishnakumar BOn 6/26/06, Jacek Laskowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/23/06, Krishnakumar B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The plan needs to have some XML Tag to say this resource needs to gets into Global JNDI and the builder can then add it to geronimo: Context. This is not implemented yet. Currently if we deploy a connector it gets in global jndi. I might've misunderstood it, but isn't Global JNDI == geronimo: context == global: context? If so, why is this copying from Global JNDI to the geronimo: namespace? Looking forward to seeing your patch for it. Just as Guillaume suggested, please create an JIRA issue and attach the patch to it. Krishnakumar B Jacek -- Jacek Laskowski http://www.laskowski.net.pl
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
On 6/23/06, Krishnakumar B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The plan needs to have some XML Tag to say this resource needs to gets into Global JNDI and the builder can then add it to geronimo: Context. This is not implemented yet. Currently if we deploy a connector it gets in global jndi. I might've misunderstood it, but isn't Global JNDI == geronimo: context == global: context? If so, why is this copying from Global JNDI to the geronimo: namespace? Looking forward to seeing your patch for it. Just as Guillaume suggested, please create an JIRA issue and attach the patch to it. Krishnakumar B Jacek -- Jacek Laskowski http://www.laskowski.net.pl
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
Could you raise a JIRA and attach the patch for review ?Thanks,Guillaume NodetOn 6/23/06, Krishnakumar B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:hi,We ( Me Manu )have created a implementation of global JNDI based on the feedback received on the dev list.It works like this.* The implementation uses GeronimoRootContext and ReadOnlyContextthats part of naming module to create the root context ( geronimo: ). TheContext is accessed by means of a FactoryGeronimoInitialContextFactory that implements InitialContextFactory.* A GBean ( GeronimoContextGBean ) loads on start of server andcreates the Root Context.Now applications can bind to this context. * We have added GBeans to naming ( GlobalJNDIBindingGBean for RA,DataSource, QCF/TCF,Queue, Topicand EJBJNDIBindingGBean for EJB )that are deployed when an app is deployed.* The builders add the Gbeans during the deployment process. [ ConnectorModule Builder, OpenEJBModuleBuilder, ServiceConfigBuilder ].The plan needs to have some XML Tag to say this resource needs to getsinto Global JNDI and the builder can then add it to geronimo: Context. This is not implemented yet. Currently if we deploy a connector itgets in global jndi.The current code we can add DataSource, RA, EJB, QCF, Queue/Topic,GBeans to geronimo: Context. With some changes to context implementation any object can be bound to global JNDI. ( Have notlooked at security aspect and would need some ideas on how to proceed).This may need some more work and changes before it takes final form to get into product. Kindly provide your review, comments andcontributions from others who are interested and have better ideas.We are not able to attach the code as mailing list rejects attachments.Regards Krishnakumar BOn 5/24/06, Krishnakumar B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for the feedback and inputs. Regards Krishnakumar On 5/24/06, Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 23, 2006, at 5:19 PM, David Jencks wrote: On May 23, 2006, at 6:28 AM, Krishnakumar B wrote: Hi, I have a few doubts related to implementation of global jndi. * Currently we have java:comp/env stored in Local JNDI. In Global JNDI should objects be bound using a different namespace e.g) java: or java:global? IIUC java: is reserved by the j2ee spec for what it requires: thus IMO we should use something else.IIRC the original global jndi context used geronimo:I'm OK with that or maybe global:. IIRC some servers use just /foo/bar with no context.If I am correct, we should support that also (but not the default). * When we implement global JNDI we have some entries in Global and All entries related to application in Local. When a user creates a context he needs to get from either global or local based on what he needs. Would it be right for lookup code to decide from where to fetch the entry based on how the Context is created? for e.g) if i say InitialContext iniCtx = new InitialContext(java:comp/env); fetch from local and if InitialContext iniCtx = new InitialContext(java:global); fetch from global I'm not sure what you're asking about here.Unless you do something screwy to link one of these to the other, the contents of these contexts will be completely unrelated. Looking at the JavaDocs for InitialContext, it does not have a constructor that takes a String.Did you mean: Context context = (Context) new InitialContext().lookup(java:comp/ env); Context context = (Context) new InitialContext().lookup(global:); * Currently in Local JNDI we store Resource References. Should global JNDI also use the same approach or can we use Object references for e.g ) DataSource reference directly put in JNDI For j2ee components I think we should bind the same kinds of References in the global jndi tree as we bind in the current java: context.What we bind for stuff that can't get into the java: context needs more thought: it probably depends on what it is.Of course if the context is not read-only an app can bind whatever it wants wherever it wants, thus bringing to mind the need for security and permissions for this stuff. I don't think we can use the current Reference object we bind into our read only context because they do cache the value and never release it.It is expected that the referece will be GCed when the J2EE application is unloaded.It shouldn't be hard to either turn off the cache or to register listener for the reference target life- cycle events.Would appreciate any thoughts as i am still learning and might have missed some points to consider while trying to implement something like this. My plan for implementing this was: 1. Look at the current ReadOnlyContext implementation and figure out how to make a sufficiently synchronized version of it.I'm hoping that we can have synchronized wrappers around this implementation rather than needing a copy, subclass, or new implementation. I think a read only JNDI and a
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
Thanks for the feedback and inputs. Regards Krishnakumar On 5/24/06, Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 23, 2006, at 5:19 PM, David Jencks wrote: On May 23, 2006, at 6:28 AM, Krishnakumar B wrote: Hi, I have a few doubts related to implementation of global jndi. * Currently we have java:comp/env stored in Local JNDI. In Global JNDI should objects be bound using a different namespace e.g) java: or java:global? IIUC java: is reserved by the j2ee spec for what it requires: thus IMO we should use something else. IIRC the original global jndi context used geronimo: I'm OK with that or maybe global:. IIRC some servers use just /foo/bar with no context. If I am correct, we should support that also (but not the default). * When we implement global JNDI we have some entries in Global and All entries related to application in Local. When a user creates a context he needs to get from either global or local based on what he needs. Would it be right for lookup code to decide from where to fetch the entry based on how the Context is created? for e.g) if i say InitialContext iniCtx = new InitialContext(java:comp/env); fetch from local and if InitialContext iniCtx = new InitialContext(java:global); fetch from global I'm not sure what you're asking about here. Unless you do something screwy to link one of these to the other, the contents of these contexts will be completely unrelated. Looking at the JavaDocs for InitialContext, it does not have a constructor that takes a String. Did you mean: Context context = (Context) new InitialContext().lookup(java:comp/ env); Context context = (Context) new InitialContext().lookup(global:); * Currently in Local JNDI we store Resource References. Should global JNDI also use the same approach or can we use Object references for e.g) DataSource reference directly put in JNDI For j2ee components I think we should bind the same kinds of References in the global jndi tree as we bind in the current java: context. What we bind for stuff that can't get into the java: context needs more thought: it probably depends on what it is. Of course if the context is not read-only an app can bind whatever it wants wherever it wants, thus bringing to mind the need for security and permissions for this stuff. I don't think we can use the current Reference object we bind into our read only context because they do cache the value and never release it. It is expected that the referece will be GCed when the J2EE application is unloaded. It shouldn't be hard to either turn off the cache or to register listener for the reference target life- cycle events. Would appreciate any thoughts as i am still learning and might have missed some points to consider while trying to implement something like this. My plan for implementing this was: 1. Look at the current ReadOnlyContext implementation and figure out how to make a sufficiently synchronized version of it. I'm hoping that we can have synchronized wrappers around this implementation rather than needing a copy, subclass, or new implementation. I think a read only JNDI and a mutable one are different enough that they need separate implementations. Currently our ENC is using a the EnterpriseNamingContext which does not extend ReadOnlyContext (as it isn't really read only). I'd like to keep the EnterpriseNamingContext simple and strictly read only. Therefore, I'd like to see an new separate implementation. If I were going to write it, I'd base it on ConcurrentReaderHashMap and future objects in Java5 (or backport-concurrent-util), but I'm not writing it, so I say do whatever you are comfortable with. 2. Remind myself of how the geronimo: context used to be installed. I think the same method will still work. We might want a gbean to specifically install it. Make sure that programmatic binding and lookup works. IIRC, we add set naming provider package to org.apache.geronimo.naming and when a user tries to access the foo: root-context, the jvm looks for the class org.apache.geronimo.naming.foo.fooURLContextFactory. We still have one named global that most likely gets loaded when someone looks up global: 3. Figure out how to bind stuff into this context from plans rather than java code. Currently my idea is to do this with binding gbeans: I'm not entirely sure how to do this but one possibility would be to have them contain a Reference object and the name to bind it under. Another possibility would be to not use References but rather have a binding gbean with say a gbean reference to a ManagedConnectionFactoryWrapper: the gbean would call $getResource () on it and then bind the result directly into jndi. This would result in simpler builders but more gbeans: we'd need one for resource-refs and resource-env-refs, and another one for ejbs, and another for plain gbean bindings. One thing I like about this second plan is that the object would only be
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
Hi, I have a few doubts related to implementation of global jndi. * Currently we have java:comp/env stored in Local JNDI. In Global JNDI should objects be bound using a different namespace e.g) java: or java:global? * When we implement global JNDI we have some entries in Global and All entries related to application in Local. When a user creates a context he needs to get from either global or local based on what he needs. Would it be right for lookup code to decide from where to fetch the entry based on how the Context is created? for e.g) if i say InitialContext iniCtx = new InitialContext(java:comp/env); fetch from local and if InitialContext iniCtx = new InitialContext(java:global); fetch from global * Currently in Local JNDI we store Resource References. Should global JNDI also use the same approach or can we use Object references for e.g) DataSource reference directly put in JNDI Would appreciate any thoughts as i am still learning and might have missed some points to consider while trying to implement something like this. Regards Krishnakumar On 4/28/06, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Apr 27, 2006, at 9:16 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote: I think we need to provide a non-persistent r/w global jndi tree since there are so many apps that depend on it. In addition, I think we need a way for users to provide a set of bindings (JNDI, cos-naming, jaxr... really anything) to EJBs, RAs, and any GBean so that the services they need are available where their application expect. I have been thinking about the binding problem for a while and just haven't had time to work on it myself. I think we can do something as simple as this for most services: gbean name=foo-binding class=org.apache.geronimo.naming.JndiBinding reference name=objectnamemyService/... attribute name=addressservices/myService/... /... For J2EE services we want to bind, I think the xml above is way to complex and we need to provide some syntactic sugar. That's basically what I had in mind, but expressed more clearly and concretely thanks david jencks -dain On Apr 27, 2006, at 1:22 AM, David Jencks wrote: I'm not convinced this discussion has got to the hard parts yet :-) I hope there turn out not to be any :-) Please don't change stuff in the read-only java:comp/env context since it is pretty much completely specified by the spec. Note also that according to the spec a j2ee compliant app will only use this jndi context, and only use the entries defined in the j2ee deployment descriptors. I think you can use a lot of the jndi infrastructure we already have including the geronimo context and the references to jca connection factories, ejbs, etc. The missing part is how to get these references bound into your context. One approach is to write gbeans that install a reference when started and remove it when stopped. I would start by just including these as plain gbeans in plans, and once that works consider modifying the builders to add them automatically based on xml in the geronimo plans. An alternative might be to investigating using say Directory to persist the references directly. I don't know enough about ldap to know if this makes any sense at all. thanks david jencks On Apr 26, 2006, at 11:56 PM, Manu George wrote: Comments inline On 4/26/06, Guillaume Nodet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looking more closely, it seems I was wrong. Gbeans with a j2eeType=JCAManagedConnectionFactory have a connectionFactoryInterface attribute that gives the name of the main interface to use when binding the object to the JNDI context. For EJB, GBeans with a j2eeType=StatelessSessionBean (or EntityBean ...) have attributes for the home and business interfaces. So i guess it should be ok. great Another way to handle that would be to bind the resource to the global JNDI tree when the resource is created: each configuration would contain a list of gbeans to bind in the jndi tree when the configuration is loaded. Else, we will need some listener to listen to gbeans creation / destruction so that we can bind / unbind them from the global jndi context. Binding the resource during creation seems to be the simpler way. But what about the next time the server starts up. How is the context initialised? Do we populate during startup of each resource or application again or is persistence used in some way? In the case of listeners the above problem won't arise. A few questions: * I' m wondering how the global JNDI context will coexist with the existing ENC context, especially if the global jndi context is read-write ... Maybe there is no need for a local jndi context ... Yes that is a question i also have :-) . The local jndi context allows us to have app specific contexts and this has some advantages. A global jndi also has some advantages. Probably by default we can use the local context and if the user specifies a custom factory the global one or
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
On May 23, 2006, at 6:28 AM, Krishnakumar B wrote: Hi, I have a few doubts related to implementation of global jndi. * Currently we have java:comp/env stored in Local JNDI. In Global JNDI should objects be bound using a different namespace e.g) java: or java:global? IIUC java: is reserved by the j2ee spec for what it requires: thus IMO we should use something else. IIRC the original global jndi context used geronimo: I'm OK with that or maybe global:. * When we implement global JNDI we have some entries in Global and All entries related to application in Local. When a user creates a context he needs to get from either global or local based on what he needs. Would it be right for lookup code to decide from where to fetch the entry based on how the Context is created? for e.g) if i say InitialContext iniCtx = new InitialContext(java:comp/env); fetch from local and if InitialContext iniCtx = new InitialContext(java:global); fetch from global I'm not sure what you're asking about here. Unless you do something screwy to link one of these to the other, the contents of these contexts will be completely unrelated. * Currently in Local JNDI we store Resource References. Should global JNDI also use the same approach or can we use Object references for e.g) DataSource reference directly put in JNDI For j2ee components I think we should bind the same kinds of References in the global jndi tree as we bind in the current java: context. What we bind for stuff that can't get into the java: context needs more thought: it probably depends on what it is. Of course if the context is not read-only an app can bind whatever it wants wherever it wants, thus bringing to mind the need for security and permissions for this stuff. Would appreciate any thoughts as i am still learning and might have missed some points to consider while trying to implement something like this. My plan for implementing this was: 1. Look at the current ReadOnlyContext implementation and figure out how to make a sufficiently synchronized version of it. I'm hoping that we can have synchronized wrappers around this implementation rather than needing a copy, subclass, or new implementation. 2. Remind myself of how the geronimo: context used to be installed. I think the same method will still work. We might want a gbean to specifically install it. Make sure that programmatic binding and lookup works. 3. Figure out how to bind stuff into this context from plans rather than java code. Currently my idea is to do this with binding gbeans: I'm not entirely sure how to do this but one possibility would be to have them contain a Reference object and the name to bind it under. Another possibility would be to not use References but rather have a binding gbean with say a gbean reference to a ManagedConnectionFactoryWrapper: the gbean would call $getResource() on it and then bind the result directly into jndi. This would result in simpler builders but more gbeans: we'd need one for resource-refs and resource-env-refs, and another one for ejbs, and another for plain gbean bindings. One thing I like about this second plan is that the object would only be bound in jndi while the resource was actually available. Of course, the component that looks up the entry can still keep it until the underlying gbean support is long gone, and get exceptions when it tries to use the entry. I was planning to work on this for 1.2, but I will be more than happy to work with you if you would like to implement it. Please let us know of your intentions, progress, and please, if you decide not to implement it let us know :-) I'll be mostly offline for the next few days but will try to check for messages and respond as often as I can. many thanks david jencks Regards Krishnakumar On 4/28/06, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Apr 27, 2006, at 9:16 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote: I think we need to provide a non-persistent r/w global jndi tree since there are so many apps that depend on it. In addition, I think we need a way for users to provide a set of bindings (JNDI, cos-naming, jaxr... really anything) to EJBs, RAs, and any GBean so that the services they need are available where their application expect. I have been thinking about the binding problem for a while and just haven't had time to work on it myself. I think we can do something as simple as this for most services: gbean name=foo-binding class=org.apache.geronimo.naming.JndiBinding reference name=objectnamemyService/... attribute name=addressservices/myService/... /... For J2EE services we want to bind, I think the xml above is way to complex and we need to provide some syntactic sugar. That's basically what I had in mind, but expressed more clearly and concretely thanks david jencks -dain On Apr 27, 2006, at 1:22 AM, David Jencks wrote: I'm not convinced this discussion
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
On May 23, 2006, at 5:19 PM, David Jencks wrote: On May 23, 2006, at 6:28 AM, Krishnakumar B wrote: Hi, I have a few doubts related to implementation of global jndi. * Currently we have java:comp/env stored in Local JNDI. In Global JNDI should objects be bound using a different namespace e.g) java: or java:global? IIUC java: is reserved by the j2ee spec for what it requires: thus IMO we should use something else. IIRC the original global jndi context used geronimo: I'm OK with that or maybe global:. IIRC some servers use just /foo/bar with no context. If I am correct, we should support that also (but not the default). * When we implement global JNDI we have some entries in Global and All entries related to application in Local. When a user creates a context he needs to get from either global or local based on what he needs. Would it be right for lookup code to decide from where to fetch the entry based on how the Context is created? for e.g) if i say InitialContext iniCtx = new InitialContext(java:comp/env); fetch from local and if InitialContext iniCtx = new InitialContext(java:global); fetch from global I'm not sure what you're asking about here. Unless you do something screwy to link one of these to the other, the contents of these contexts will be completely unrelated. Looking at the JavaDocs for InitialContext, it does not have a constructor that takes a String. Did you mean: Context context = (Context) new InitialContext().lookup(java:comp/ env); Context context = (Context) new InitialContext().lookup(global:); * Currently in Local JNDI we store Resource References. Should global JNDI also use the same approach or can we use Object references for e.g) DataSource reference directly put in JNDI For j2ee components I think we should bind the same kinds of References in the global jndi tree as we bind in the current java: context. What we bind for stuff that can't get into the java: context needs more thought: it probably depends on what it is. Of course if the context is not read-only an app can bind whatever it wants wherever it wants, thus bringing to mind the need for security and permissions for this stuff. I don't think we can use the current Reference object we bind into our read only context because they do cache the value and never release it. It is expected that the referece will be GCed when the J2EE application is unloaded. It shouldn't be hard to either turn off the cache or to register listener for the reference target life- cycle events. Would appreciate any thoughts as i am still learning and might have missed some points to consider while trying to implement something like this. My plan for implementing this was: 1. Look at the current ReadOnlyContext implementation and figure out how to make a sufficiently synchronized version of it. I'm hoping that we can have synchronized wrappers around this implementation rather than needing a copy, subclass, or new implementation. I think a read only JNDI and a mutable one are different enough that they need separate implementations. Currently our ENC is using a the EnterpriseNamingContext which does not extend ReadOnlyContext (as it isn't really read only). I'd like to keep the EnterpriseNamingContext simple and strictly read only. Therefore, I'd like to see an new separate implementation. If I were going to write it, I'd base it on ConcurrentReaderHashMap and future objects in Java5 (or backport-concurrent-util), but I'm not writing it, so I say do whatever you are comfortable with. 2. Remind myself of how the geronimo: context used to be installed. I think the same method will still work. We might want a gbean to specifically install it. Make sure that programmatic binding and lookup works. IIRC, we add set naming provider package to org.apache.geronimo.naming and when a user tries to access the foo: root-context, the jvm looks for the class org.apache.geronimo.naming.foo.fooURLContextFactory. We still have one named global that most likely gets loaded when someone looks up global: 3. Figure out how to bind stuff into this context from plans rather than java code. Currently my idea is to do this with binding gbeans: I'm not entirely sure how to do this but one possibility would be to have them contain a Reference object and the name to bind it under. Another possibility would be to not use References but rather have a binding gbean with say a gbean reference to a ManagedConnectionFactoryWrapper: the gbean would call $getResource () on it and then bind the result directly into jndi. This would result in simpler builders but more gbeans: we'd need one for resource-refs and resource-env-refs, and another one for ejbs, and another for plain gbean bindings. One thing I like about this second plan is that the object would only be bound in jndi while the resource was actually
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
I agree with what Dain said. I also believe that as the spec says the J2EE component enviroment should not be writable and we need not provide any option for that either. It is not necessary. Apps can bind to other namespaces.On 4/26/06, Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are you planning on making the J2EE component enviroment (java:comp/env) writable?I can see making the global tree writable, but amconcerned about making the component environment itself writable.The J2EE 1.4 spec page 64 states:The container must ensure that the application component instanceshave onlyread access to their environment variables. The container must throw thejavax.naming.OperationNotSupportedException from all the methods of thejavax.naming.Context interface that modify the environment namingcontextand its subcontextsI suppose we could add an optional flag for non-compliantapplications to allow them to modify their environment, but I think the default for the component environment should be read-only.BTW, I am in favor of making everything else writable.-dainOn Apr 26, 2006, at 6:32 AM, Manu George wrote: Hi, Guillaume I guess if a writable context is implemented still the approach given above should work. As we will be using the ENCConfigBuilder only to populate the ENC during startup the interfaces can be used to refer to the gbeans representing the deployed artefacts. Whatever we will be writing to context from apps would be done after startup of server and lost at shutdown.So there would not be any problem due to geronimo using interfaces to get the GBean names as what we will be adding at runtime will not be gbeans and we will not use ENCConfigBuilder.Am I right? Now a new property for jndiname will also be required in the plans for the connectors. P.S.This property was actually present in the older versions of geronimo but was removed. I also remember david jencks mentioning in the mailing list that he had a working implementation of a context which he removed for some reason. Thanks Manu On 4/26/06, Guillaume Nodet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When a JNDI context is created for a given configuration, the interface name is used to determine the name of the gbean that will be mapped to this JNDI reference (and to create a proxy ?). Take a look at o.a.g.naming.ENCConfigBuilder#addResourceRefs. But I guess this is irrelevant if the objects are bound when they are created. Btw, should the global JNDI tree be read-only, or read-write ? IMHO, a read-write global JNDI tree would be very usefull. Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Manu George wrote:Thanks David. Guillaume , Which proxy in the JNDI Tree are you referring where geronimo requires the main interface name?Are you speaking of UserTransaction etc? I thought those were standard names that we can use to access them and will not be provided in DD? Please clarify and correct me if I am wrong. Thanks Manu On 4/25/06, *David Jencks* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's required for corba ejb references. david jencks On Apr 25, 2006, at 7:34 AM, Manu George wrote: Hi, I have a question regarding one of the objects present in the current application local JNDI Context. What is the HandleDelegate entry for? Thanks Manu
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
Comments inlineOn 4/26/06, Guillaume Nodet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looking more closely, it seems I was wrong.Gbeans with a j2eeType=JCAManagedConnectionFactory have aconnectionFactoryInterface attribute that gives the name of the maininterface to use when binding the object to the JNDI context. For EJB, GBeans with a j2eeType=StatelessSessionBean (or EntityBean ...)have attributes for the home and business interfaces.So i guess it should be ok. great Another way to handle that would be to bind the resource to the globalJNDI tree when the resource is created: each configuration would contain a list of gbeans to bind in the jndi tree when the configuration isloaded.Else, we will need some listener to listen to gbeans creation /destruction so that we can bind / unbind them from the global jndi context. Binding the resource during creation seems to be the simpler way. But what about the next time the server starts up. How is the context initialised? Do we populate during startup of each resource or application again or is persistence used in some way? In the case of listeners the above problem won't arise. A few questions: * I' m wondering how the global JNDI context will coexist with the existing ENC context, especially if the global jndi context isread-write ... Maybe there is no need for a local jndi context ... Yes that is a question i also have :-) . The local jndi context allows us to have app specific contexts and this has some advantages. A global jndi also has some advantages. Probably by default we can use the local context and if the user specifies a custom factory the global one or vice versa. * what is the purpose of the jndiname property ? If this is the key fora gbean in the jndi tree, I thought we could use the name attribute of the gbean: jdbc/TradeDataSource , jms/QueueConnectionFactory. These names can also be TradeDatasource so then we may need to add jdbc and if jdbc is there in the name as you mentioned do we need to add jdbc to the name or not. These are a few issues which made me propose the jndiName property . * what about conflicting names for JCA resources... currently there isnothing to prevent deploying JCA resource (or other resources that would be bound to jndi) with the same nameI think deployment should fail with an resource already bound exception. Not sure if this or any other validation is implemented for the local context. Thanks Manu
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
I'm not convinced this discussion has got to the hard parts yet :-) I hope there turn out not to be any :-)Please don't change stuff in the read-only java:comp/env context since it is pretty much completely specified by the spec. Note also that according to the spec a j2ee compliant app will only use this jndi context, and only use the entries defined in the j2ee deployment descriptors.I think you can use a lot of the jndi infrastructure we already have including the geronimo context and the references to jca connection factories, ejbs, etc. The missing part is how to get these references bound into your context. One approach is to write gbeans that install a reference when started and remove it when stopped. I would start by just including these as plain gbeans in plans, and once that works consider modifying the builders to add them automatically based on xml in the geronimo plans.An alternative might be to investigating using say Directory to persist the references directly. I don't know enough about ldap to know if this makes any sense at all.thanksdavid jencksOn Apr 26, 2006, at 11:56 PM, Manu George wrote:Comments inlineOn 4/26/06, Guillaume Nodet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looking more closely, it seems I was wrong.Gbeans with a j2eeType=JCAManagedConnectionFactory have aconnectionFactoryInterface attribute that gives the name of the maininterface to use when binding the object to the JNDI context. For EJB, GBeans with a j2eeType=StatelessSessionBean (or EntityBean ...)have attributes for the home and business interfaces.So i guess it should be ok. great Another way to handle that would be to bind the resource to the globalJNDI tree when the resource is created: each configuration would contain a list of gbeans to bind in the jndi tree when the configuration isloaded. Else, we will need some listener to listen to gbeans creation /destruction so that we can bind / unbind them from the global jndi context. Binding the resource during creation seems to be the simpler way. But what about the next time the server starts up. How is the context initialised? Do we populate during startup of each resource or application again or is persistence used in some way? In the case of listeners the above problem won't arise. A few questions: * I' m wondering how the global JNDI context will coexist with the existing ENC context, especially if the global jndi context isread-write ... Maybe there is no need for a local jndi context ... Yes that is a question i also have :-) . The local jndi context allows us to have app specific contexts and this has some advantages. A global jndi also has some advantages. Probably by default we can use the local context and if the user specifies a custom factory the global one or vice versa. * what is the purpose of the jndiname property ? If this is the key fora gbean in the jndi tree, I thought we could use the name attribute of the gbean: "jdbc/TradeDataSource" , "jms/QueueConnectionFactory". These names can also be TradeDatasource so then we may need to add jdbc and if jdbc is there in the name as you mentioned do we need to add jdbc to the name or not. These are a few issues which made me propose the jndiName property . * what about conflicting names for JCA resources... currently there isnothing to prevent deploying JCA resource (or other resources that would be bound to jndi) with the same nameI think deployment should fail with an resource already bound exception. Not sure if this or any other validation is implemented for the local context. Thanks Manu
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
I think we need to provide a non-persistent r/w global jndi tree since there are so many apps that depend on it. In addition, I think we need a way for users to provide a set of bindings (JNDI, cos- naming, jaxr... really anything) to EJBs, RAs, and any GBean so that the services they need are available where their application expect. I have been thinking about the binding problem for a while and just haven't had time to work on it myself. I think we can do something as simple as this for most services: gbean name=foo-binding class=org.apache.geronimo.naming.JndiBinding reference name=objectnamemyService/... attribute name=addressservices/myService/... /... For J2EE services we want to bind, I think the xml above is way to complex and we need to provide some syntactic sugar. -dain On Apr 27, 2006, at 1:22 AM, David Jencks wrote: I'm not convinced this discussion has got to the hard parts yet :-) I hope there turn out not to be any :-) Please don't change stuff in the read-only java:comp/env context since it is pretty much completely specified by the spec. Note also that according to the spec a j2ee compliant app will only use this jndi context, and only use the entries defined in the j2ee deployment descriptors. I think you can use a lot of the jndi infrastructure we already have including the geronimo context and the references to jca connection factories, ejbs, etc. The missing part is how to get these references bound into your context. One approach is to write gbeans that install a reference when started and remove it when stopped. I would start by just including these as plain gbeans in plans, and once that works consider modifying the builders to add them automatically based on xml in the geronimo plans. An alternative might be to investigating using say Directory to persist the references directly. I don't know enough about ldap to know if this makes any sense at all. thanks david jencks On Apr 26, 2006, at 11:56 PM, Manu George wrote: Comments inline On 4/26/06, Guillaume Nodet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looking more closely, it seems I was wrong. Gbeans with a j2eeType=JCAManagedConnectionFactory have a connectionFactoryInterface attribute that gives the name of the main interface to use when binding the object to the JNDI context. For EJB, GBeans with a j2eeType=StatelessSessionBean (or EntityBean ...) have attributes for the home and business interfaces. So i guess it should be ok. great Another way to handle that would be to bind the resource to the global JNDI tree when the resource is created: each configuration would contain a list of gbeans to bind in the jndi tree when the configuration is loaded. Else, we will need some listener to listen to gbeans creation / destruction so that we can bind / unbind them from the global jndi context. Binding the resource during creation seems to be the simpler way. But what about the next time the server starts up. How is the context initialised? Do we populate during startup of each resource or application again or is persistence used in some way? In the case of listeners the above problem won't arise. A few questions: * I' m wondering how the global JNDI context will coexist with the existing ENC context, especially if the global jndi context is read-write ... Maybe there is no need for a local jndi context ... Yes that is a question i also have :-) . The local jndi context allows us to have app specific contexts and this has some advantages. A global jndi also has some advantages. Probably by default we can use the local context and if the user specifies a custom factory the global one or vice versa. * what is the purpose of the jndiname property ? If this is the key for a gbean in the jndi tree, I thought we could use the name attribute of the gbean: jdbc/TradeDataSource , jms/QueueConnectionFactory. These names can also be TradeDatasource so then we may need to add jdbc and if jdbc is there in the name as you mentioned do we need to add jdbc to the name or not. These are a few issues which made me propose the jndiName property . * what about conflicting names for JCA resources... currently there is nothing to prevent deploying JCA resource (or other resources that would be bound to jndi) with the same name I think deployment should fail with an resource already bound exception. Not sure if this or any other validation is implemented for the local context. Thanks Manu
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
On Apr 27, 2006, at 9:16 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote: I think we need to provide a non-persistent r/w global jndi tree since there are so many apps that depend on it. In addition, I think we need a way for users to provide a set of bindings (JNDI, cos-naming, jaxr... really anything) to EJBs, RAs, and any GBean so that the services they need are available where their application expect. I have been thinking about the binding problem for a while and just haven't had time to work on it myself. I think we can do something as simple as this for most services: gbean name=foo-binding class=org.apache.geronimo.naming.JndiBinding reference name=objectnamemyService/... attribute name=addressservices/myService/... /... For J2EE services we want to bind, I think the xml above is way to complex and we need to provide some syntactic sugar. That's basically what I had in mind, but expressed more clearly and concretely thanks david jencks -dain On Apr 27, 2006, at 1:22 AM, David Jencks wrote: I'm not convinced this discussion has got to the hard parts yet :-) I hope there turn out not to be any :-) Please don't change stuff in the read-only java:comp/env context since it is pretty much completely specified by the spec. Note also that according to the spec a j2ee compliant app will only use this jndi context, and only use the entries defined in the j2ee deployment descriptors. I think you can use a lot of the jndi infrastructure we already have including the geronimo context and the references to jca connection factories, ejbs, etc. The missing part is how to get these references bound into your context. One approach is to write gbeans that install a reference when started and remove it when stopped. I would start by just including these as plain gbeans in plans, and once that works consider modifying the builders to add them automatically based on xml in the geronimo plans. An alternative might be to investigating using say Directory to persist the references directly. I don't know enough about ldap to know if this makes any sense at all. thanks david jencks On Apr 26, 2006, at 11:56 PM, Manu George wrote: Comments inline On 4/26/06, Guillaume Nodet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looking more closely, it seems I was wrong. Gbeans with a j2eeType=JCAManagedConnectionFactory have a connectionFactoryInterface attribute that gives the name of the main interface to use when binding the object to the JNDI context. For EJB, GBeans with a j2eeType=StatelessSessionBean (or EntityBean ...) have attributes for the home and business interfaces. So i guess it should be ok. great Another way to handle that would be to bind the resource to the global JNDI tree when the resource is created: each configuration would contain a list of gbeans to bind in the jndi tree when the configuration is loaded. Else, we will need some listener to listen to gbeans creation / destruction so that we can bind / unbind them from the global jndi context. Binding the resource during creation seems to be the simpler way. But what about the next time the server starts up. How is the context initialised? Do we populate during startup of each resource or application again or is persistence used in some way? In the case of listeners the above problem won't arise. A few questions: * I' m wondering how the global JNDI context will coexist with the existing ENC context, especially if the global jndi context is read-write ... Maybe there is no need for a local jndi context ... Yes that is a question i also have :-) . The local jndi context allows us to have app specific contexts and this has some advantages. A global jndi also has some advantages. Probably by default we can use the local context and if the user specifies a custom factory the global one or vice versa. * what is the purpose of the jndiname property ? If this is the key for a gbean in the jndi tree, I thought we could use the name attribute of the gbean: jdbc/TradeDataSource , jms/QueueConnectionFactory. These names can also be TradeDatasource so then we may need to add jdbc and if jdbc is there in the name as you mentioned do we need to add jdbc to the name or not. These are a few issues which made me propose the jndiName property . * what about conflicting names for JCA resources... currently there is nothing to prevent deploying JCA resource (or other resources that would be bound to jndi) with the same name I think deployment should fail with an resource already bound exception. Not sure if this or any other validation is implemented for the local context. Thanks Manu
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
Thanks David. Guillaume , Which proxy in the JNDI Tree are you referring where geronimo requires the main interface name? Are you speaking of UserTransaction etc? I thought those were standard names that we can use to access them and will not be provided in DD? Please clarify and correct me if I am wrong. Thanks Manu On 4/25/06, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's required for corba ejb references.david jencksOn Apr 25, 2006, at 7:34 AM, Manu George wrote: Hi, I have a question regarding one of the objects present in the current application local JNDI Context. What is the HandleDelegate entry for? Thanks Manu
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
When a JNDI context is created for a given configuration, the interface name is used to determine the name of the gbean that will be mapped to this JNDI reference (and to create a proxy ?). Take a look at o.a.g.naming.ENCConfigBuilder#addResourceRefs. But I guess this is irrelevant if the objects are bound when they are created. Btw, should the global JNDI tree be read-only, or read-write ? IMHO, a read-write global JNDI tree would be very usefull. Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Manu George wrote: Thanks David. Guillaume , Which proxy in the JNDI Tree are you referring where geronimo requires the main interface name? Are you speaking of UserTransaction etc? I thought those were standard names that we can use to access them and will not be provided in DD? Please clarify and correct me if I am wrong. Thanks Manu On 4/25/06, *David Jencks* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's required for corba ejb references. david jencks On Apr 25, 2006, at 7:34 AM, Manu George wrote: Hi, I have a question regarding one of the objects present in the current application local JNDI Context. What is the HandleDelegate entry for? Thanks Manu
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
Hi Guillaume, The ENCConfigBuilder and ComponentContextBuilder are called when u deploy an application and need a JNDI reference. How does it happen when u start the app server with some apps already deployed? How is the Context built? Regards Krish On 4/26/06, Guillaume Nodet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When a JNDI context is created for a given configuration, the interface name is used to determine the name of the gbean that will be mapped to this JNDI reference (and to create a proxy ?). Take a look at o.a.g.naming.ENCConfigBuilder#addResourceRefs. But I guess this is irrelevant if the objects are bound when they are created. Btw, should the global JNDI tree be read-only, or read-write ? IMHO, a read-write global JNDI tree would be very usefull. Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Manu George wrote: Thanks David. Guillaume , Which proxy in the JNDI Tree are you referring where geronimo requires the main interface name? Are you speaking of UserTransaction etc? I thought those were standard names that we can use to access them and will not be provided in DD? Please clarify and correct me if I am wrong. Thanks Manu On 4/25/06, *David Jencks* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's required for corba ejb references. david jencks On Apr 25, 2006, at 7:34 AM, Manu George wrote: Hi, I have a question regarding one of the objects present in the current application local JNDI Context. What is the HandleDelegate entry for? Thanks Manu
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
Hi, Guillaume I guess if a writable context is implemented still the approach given above should work. As we will be using the ENCConfigBuilder only to populate the ENC during startup the interfaces can be used to refer to the gbeans representing the deployed artefacts. Whatever we will be writing to context from apps would be done after startup of server and lost at shutdown. So there would not be any problem due to geronimo using interfaces to get the GBean names as what we will be adding at runtime will not be gbeans and we will not use ENCConfigBuilder. Am I right? Now a new property for jndiname will also be required in the plans for the connectors. P.S.This property was actually present in the older versions of geronimo but was removed. I also remember david jencks mentioning in the mailing list that he had a working implementation of a context which he removed for some reason. Thanks Manu On 4/26/06, Guillaume Nodet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:When a JNDI context is created for a given configuration, the interfacename is used to determine the name of the gbean that will be mapped to this JNDI reference (and to create a proxy ?).Take a look at o.a.g.naming.ENCConfigBuilder#addResourceRefs.But I guess this is irrelevant if the objects are bound when they arecreated. Btw, should the global JNDI tree be read-only, or read-write ?IMHO, a read-write global JNDI tree would be very usefull.Cheers,Guillaume Nodet Manu George wrote:Thanks David.Guillaume , Which proxy in the JNDI Tree are you referring wheregeronimo requires the main interface name?Are you speaking of UserTransaction etc? I thought those were standard names that we canuse to access them and will not be provided in DD? Please clarify andcorrect me if I am wrong. ThanksManuOn 4/25/06, *David Jencks* [EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:It's required for corba ejb references.david jencksOn Apr 25, 2006, at 7:34 AM, Manu George wrote: Hi, I have a question regarding one of the objects present in the current application local JNDI Context. What is the HandleDelegate entry for? Thanks Manu
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
Looking more closely, it seems I was wrong. Gbeans with a j2eeType=JCAManagedConnectionFactory have a connectionFactoryInterface attribute that gives the name of the main interface to use when binding the object to the JNDI context. For EJB, GBeans with a j2eeType=StatelessSessionBean (or EntityBean ...) have attributes for the home and business interfaces. So i guess it should be ok. Another way to handle that would be to bind the resource to the global JNDI tree when the resource is created: each configuration would contain a list of gbeans to bind in the jndi tree when the configuration is loaded. Else, we will need some listener to listen to gbeans creation / destruction so that we can bind / unbind them from the global jndi context. A few questions: * I' m wondering how the global JNDI context will coexist with the existing ENC context, especially if the global jndi context is read-write ... Maybe there is no need for a local jndi context ... * what is the purpose of the jndiname property ? If this is the key for a gbean in the jndi tree, I thought we could use the name attribute of the gbean: jdbc/TradeDataSource , jms/QueueConnectionFactory. * what about conflicting names for JCA resources... currently there is nothing to prevent deploying JCA resource (or other resources that would be bound to jndi) with the same name Guillaume Nodet Manu George wrote: Hi, Guillaume I guess if a writable context is implemented still the approach given above should work. As we will be using the ENCConfigBuilder only to populate the ENC during startup the interfaces can be used to refer to the gbeans representing the deployed artefacts. Whatever we will be writing to context from apps would be done after startup of server and lost at shutdown. So there would not be any problem due to geronimo using interfaces to get the GBean names as what we will be adding at runtime will not be gbeans and we will not use ENCConfigBuilder. Am I right? Now a new property for jndiname will also be required in the plans for the connectors. P.S.This property was actually present in the older versions of geronimo but was removed. I also remember david jencks mentioning in the mailing list that he had a working implementation of a context which he removed for some reason. Thanks Manu On 4/26/06, Guillaume Nodet [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When a JNDI context is created for a given configuration, the interface name is used to determine the name of the gbean that will be mapped to this JNDI reference (and to create a proxy ?). Take a look at o.a.g.naming.ENCConfigBuilder#addResourceRefs. But I guess this is irrelevant if the objects are bound when they are created. Btw, should the global JNDI tree be read-only, or read-write ? IMHO, a read-write global JNDI tree would be very usefull. Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Manu George wrote: Thanks David. Guillaume , Which proxy in the JNDI Tree are you referring where geronimo requires the main interface name? Are you speaking of UserTransaction etc? I thought those were standard names that we can use to access them and will not be provided in DD? Please clarify and correct me if I am wrong. Thanks Manu On 4/25/06, *David Jencks* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's required for corba ejb references. david jencks On Apr 25, 2006, at 7:34 AM, Manu George wrote: Hi, I have a question regarding one of the objects present in the current application local JNDI Context. What is the HandleDelegate entry for? Thanks Manu
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
Are you planning on making the J2EE component enviroment (java:comp/ env) writable? I can see making the global tree writable, but am concerned about making the component environment itself writable. The J2EE 1.4 spec page 64 states: The container must ensure that the application component instances have only read access to their environment variables. The container must throw the javax.naming.OperationNotSupportedException from all the methods of the javax.naming.Context interface that modify the environment naming context and its subcontexts I suppose we could add an optional flag for non-compliant applications to allow them to modify their environment, but I think the default for the component environment should be read-only. BTW, I am in favor of making everything else writable. -dain On Apr 26, 2006, at 6:32 AM, Manu George wrote: Hi, Guillaume I guess if a writable context is implemented still the approach given above should work. As we will be using the ENCConfigBuilder only to populate the ENC during startup the interfaces can be used to refer to the gbeans representing the deployed artefacts. Whatever we will be writing to context from apps would be done after startup of server and lost at shutdown. So there would not be any problem due to geronimo using interfaces to get the GBean names as what we will be adding at runtime will not be gbeans and we will not use ENCConfigBuilder. Am I right? Now a new property for jndiname will also be required in the plans for the connectors. P.S.This property was actually present in the older versions of geronimo but was removed. I also remember david jencks mentioning in the mailing list that he had a working implementation of a context which he removed for some reason. Thanks Manu On 4/26/06, Guillaume Nodet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When a JNDI context is created for a given configuration, the interface name is used to determine the name of the gbean that will be mapped to this JNDI reference (and to create a proxy ?). Take a look at o.a.g.naming.ENCConfigBuilder#addResourceRefs. But I guess this is irrelevant if the objects are bound when they are created. Btw, should the global JNDI tree be read-only, or read-write ? IMHO, a read-write global JNDI tree would be very usefull. Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Manu George wrote: Thanks David. Guillaume , Which proxy in the JNDI Tree are you referring where geronimo requires the main interface name? Are you speaking of UserTransaction etc? I thought those were standard names that we can use to access them and will not be provided in DD? Please clarify and correct me if I am wrong. Thanks Manu On 4/25/06, *David Jencks* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's required for corba ejb references. david jencks On Apr 25, 2006, at 7:34 AM, Manu George wrote: Hi, I have a question regarding one of the objects present in the current application local JNDI Context. What is the HandleDelegate entry for? Thanks Manu
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
Hi, I have a question regarding one of the objects present in the current application local JNDI Context. What is the HandleDelegate entry for? Thanks Manu
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
I would be glad to help writing / testing this feature. Is the code available somewhere ? I also just have one question: when I was looking at how to use Geronimo JNDI implementation, i faced the problem that to access one of the proxy in the JNDI tree, Geronimo requires the main interface name (which is usually given by deployment descriptors). How did you work around that ? Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Krishnakumar B wrote: Hi, In geronimo road map there was a requirement for implementing Global JNDI for geronimo. An approach to implementing the same is posted below. Kindly post your valuable feedback. * Write and Deploy a GBean For Global JNDI * GBean on startup of server would introspect the server and build JNDI tree - jdbc - jms - ejb etc... * JNDI tree is stored in Hashmap and we can use ComponentContextBuilder to build this tree. * We can use EnterpriseNamingContext to create a context. * The Context is stored as a static variable in the Local Factory Class. * During deployment a new entry is added to Context ( Hashmap.) * During undeployment an entry is removed from Context ( Hashmap ) * We can reuse the existing the geronimo-naming package for directory operations. We have done some initial ground work ( Writing Gbean, Building JNDI Tree ) and would be glad to know how such an implementation would fit into geronimo server, limitations if any so that we know we are using the right approach. Regards Krish
Re: Implementing Global JNDI
I would be glad to help writing / testing this feature. Is the code available somewhere ? I also just have one question: when I was looking at how to use Geronimo JNDI implementation, i faced the problem that to access one of the proxy in the JNDI tree, Geronimo requires the main interface name (which is usually given by deployment descriptors). How did you work around that ? Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Krishnakumar B wrote: Hi, In geronimo road map there was a requirement for implementing Global JNDI for geronimo. An approach to implementing the same is posted below. Kindly post your valuable feedback. * Write and Deploy a GBean For Global JNDI * GBean on startup of server would introspect the server and build JNDI tree - jdbc - jms - ejb etc... * JNDI tree is stored in Hashmap and we can use ComponentContextBuilder to build this tree. * We can use EnterpriseNamingContext to create a context. * The Context is stored as a static variable in the Local Factory Class. * During deployment a new entry is added to Context ( Hashmap.) * During undeployment an entry is removed from Context ( Hashmap ) * We can reuse the existing the geronimo-naming package for directory operations. We have done some initial ground work ( Writing Gbean, Building JNDI Tree ) and would be glad to know how such an implementation would fit into geronimo server, limitations if any so that we know we are using the right approach. Regards Krish
