[JBoss-user] [EJB/JBoss] - Re: CORBA callback and EJB
If bound correctly no transaction isolation problem can arise. The appserver handles transaction, if the bean is deployed correctly. With SFSessionbeans there is ofcourse the concurrency problem. You have to solve it using a LockInterceptor. Cannot imagine, what a Home interface does at this level, but if you need it, why dont you use Naming. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=3867218#3867218 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=3867218 --- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595alloc_id=14396op=click ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [Clustering/JBoss] - Re: JMS Clustering in JBOSS
JMS is clustered since 3.2.4 out-of-the-box. There is an explanation in the wiki, sorry, that I cant post the URL. You have to start the server in the 'all' mode. Thomas View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=3865039#3865039 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=3865039 --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting Tool for open source databases. Create drag--drop reports. Save time by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc. Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [Installation Configuration] - Re: SNMP traps are not sent
Problem identified: UNIX bind permission exception The send port is a low port, and in this installation jboss is running as jboss user. Thats why the server has not access to low ports. Unfortunately there is no output in the logs about this fact. The Exception is just swallowed and thus hard to track down. Fix: use a high port as local send port (I used 8161 see Tomcat 8080 8-) Thomas View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=3863059#3863059 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=3863059 --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting Tool for open source databases. Create drag--drop reports. Save time by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc. Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [Installation Configuration] - Re: a strange startup problem
I think, the Naming service will only be accessible from localhost (127.0.0.1). Thomas View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=3862730#3862730 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=3862730 --- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It's fun and FREE -- well, almosthttp://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [Installation Configuration] - SNMP traps are not sent
I am working with JBoss 3.2.7RC1 on Linux, j2sdk1.4.2_05 I tried to activate SNMP-traps. On my W2k box it's OK at the first try. On the QA and the production system (Linux) NO traps are sent. I found a SnmpTrapAppenderTest in the log4j package, which is able to read the log4j.xml file. I tweaked it a bit to test all variations of the config (a logger for my lasses, a logger for jboss classes) and started it from the command line. Everything worked as intended (SNMP-Traps, console log, file). But the (absolutely) same log4j.xml insists in NOT sending SNMP-traps in JBoss all server. Can anyone help me? View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=3862616#3862616 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=3862616 --- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It's fun and FREE -- well, almosthttp://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt ___ JBoss-user mailing list JBoss-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [EJB/JBoss] - Re: Synchronization of Stateful Session Bean
Hi, I think I found my error. It seems to work! Many thanks for the support. Thomas View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=3839508#3839508 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=3839508 --- This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings Training. Attend Black Hat Briefings Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com ___ JBoss-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [EJB/JBoss] - Re: Synchronization of Stateful Session Bean
Thanks for the immediate response! My situation unfortunately doesn't provide the second possibility, because the clients are connected via CORBA (SFSB are TIE servants) so there will be no client interceptor stack, isn't it?. I really would have liked to implement the client interceptor, because I really like this concept. A problem I see with the stateful interceptor is the possibility of deadlock. I had a short experimental hack at the QueuedPessimisticEJBLock (inserting the EntityLockInterceptor in the container interceptor stack) which provides deadlock protection. Do you think it's worth while investing in the idea? At the moment I don't see far enough to be able to decide if I ever get to the bottom of the Tx-oriented locking. I had to remove some consistency checks (eg. regarding the change of transactional context), and so I am afraid that I entered into programmatic states that the code was not intended to cope with. I am at the moment stuck with a continuous sequence of Start wait on TxLock / End wait on TxLock of the two racing threads till the Tx expires - and both get an Exception. Regards. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=3839351#3839351 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=3839351 --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by The 2004 JavaOne(SM) Conference Learn from the experts at JavaOne(SM), Sun's Worldwide Java Developer Conference, June 28 - July 1 at the Moscone Center in San Francisco, CA REGISTER AND SAVE! http://java.sun.com/javaone/sf Priority Code NWMGYKND ___ JBoss-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
[JBoss-user] [EJB/JBoss] - Synchronization of Stateful Session Bean
Hi, I want to use SFSB for a kind of state machine. But a big problem is, that the SFSB is not synchronized, but throws an EJBException - which is correct reg. the specification. The hint I found until now was to synchronize the invocations of the SFSB on client side (eg. JSP/Servlet). But unfortnately this doesn't work with multiple clients or multithreaded clients not under my programmatic control. Can anyone help me? View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=3839339#3839339 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=3839339 --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by The 2004 JavaOne(SM) Conference Learn from the experts at JavaOne(SM), Sun's Worldwide Java Developer Conference, June 28 - July 1 at the Moscone Center in San Francisco, CA REGISTER AND SAVE! http://java.sun.com/javaone/sf Priority Code NWMGYKND ___ JBoss-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
