Re: Can't get dojo to work on Geronimo 2.2 with Java 64 bit SDK

2010-03-24 Thread zmorgan

Thanks.  I was thrown off by the info here
http://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxDEV/using-dojo-in-geronimo.html

The /dojo/dojo/dojo.js works.
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://n3.nabble.com/Can-t-get-dojo-to-work-on-Geronimo-2-2-with-Java-64-bit-SDK-tp480787p504903.html
Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


Re: Can't get dojo to work on Geronimo 2.2 with Java 64 bit SDK

2010-03-24 Thread Shawn Jiang
Hi Justin,

Try this

http://localhost:8080/dojo/dojo/dojo.js

the first /dojo is the context name of installed dojo war.   /dojo/dojo.js
is the path under the dojo war.

On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 6:53 AM, zmorgan  wrote:

>
> I am having problems confirming my dojo install.  The console and database
> works but when I point the browser to http://localhost:8080/dojo or
> http://localhost:8080/dojo/dojo.js I get a 404 error.
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://n3.nabble.com/Can-t-get-dojo-to-work-on-Geronimo-2-2-with-Java-64-bit-SDK-tp480787p480787.html
> Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>



-- 
Shawn


Can't get dojo to work on Geronimo 2.2 with Java 64 bit SDK

2010-03-24 Thread zmorgan

I am having problems confirming my dojo install.  The console and database
works but when I point the browser to http://localhost:8080/dojo or
http://localhost:8080/dojo/dojo.js I get a 404 error.
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://n3.nabble.com/Can-t-get-dojo-to-work-on-Geronimo-2-2-with-Java-64-bit-SDK-tp480787p480787.html
Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


Re: unexpected high cpu load

2010-03-24 Thread Kevan Miller

On Mar 24, 2010, at 4:06 AM, Marco Laponder wrote:

> Thanks Kevan ! As soon I am able to build the 2.2 branch (it now fails
> and is has been failing for a few days now if I check
> http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/2.2/ ) I will
> give it a try.

Ah. Nobody updated dependency version to our new txmanager release. Should be 
fixed, now.

--kevan

RE: unexpected high cpu load

2010-03-24 Thread Marco Laponder
Thanks Kevan ! As soon I am able to build the 2.2 branch (it now fails
and is has been failing for a few days now if I check
http://people.apache.org/builds/geronimo/server/binaries/2.2/ ) I will
give it a try.

Kind regards,
Marco

-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Kevan Miller [mailto:kevan.mil...@gmail.com] 
Verzonden: dinsdag 23 maart 2010 18:32
Aan: user@geronimo.apache.org
Onderwerp: Re: unexpected high cpu load


On Mar 23, 2010, at 2:53 AM, Marco Laponder wrote:

> I have create a jira for this issue
> 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-5200

Thanks Marco. Should be fixed in branches/2.1 and branches/2.2 (not
needed in trunk).

--kevan


Re: EJB Life Cycle

2010-03-24 Thread Jack Cai
I agree with David. Leave it to the container and JVM.

-Jack

On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 12:35 AM, Russell Collins <
russell.coll...@mclaneat.com> wrote:

>  Thank you for the input.  So basically what you are saying is that the
> Geronimo EJB container will handle the lifecycle of the object
> “m_anotherEJB” and I do not need to be concerned about this object hanging
> around more than it needs to?
>
>
>
> *From:* David Jencks [mailto:david_jen...@yahoo.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 23, 2010 2:38 AM
> *To:* user@geronimo.apache.org
> *Subject:* Re: EJB Life Cycle
>
>
>
> I'm not a big java GC expert but...  I think that finalize will only be
> called after the GC has decided your ejb instance is no longer in use.
>  Whether or not the proxy it's holding is still in use will be determined
> separately anyway.  My understanding is that generally  "I want to help the
> GC" code doesn't actually help appreciably and mostly gives you more code to
> install bugs in and maintain.
>
>
>
> david jencks
>
>
>
> On Mar 22, 2010, at 7:03 PM, Russell Collins wrote:
>
>
>
>   I have been thinking about best practices with Geronimo.  One of the
> things that I have been thinking about is the life of EJB’s inside the EJB
> container.  I am wondering if I should be setting used EJB’s to null when I
> am done with them or should I just let the container handle it.  Example
> Code:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> @Stateless
>
> public class MyEJB implements IMyEJB
>
> {
>
>
>
>@EJB(name=”AnotherEJBLocal”)
>
>private IAnotherEJBLocal m_anotherEJB;
>
>
>
>   // Do some stuff with m_anotherEJB;
>
>
>
>protected void finalize()
>
>{
>
>  m_anotherEJB = null;  //  Should I do this or let Geronimo handle it
>
> }
>
>
>
> }
>
>
>
> Should I be including the finalizer code as I have it?  Should I just let
> Geronimo handle the life cycle?  Is there a different/better way to handle
> this?  Any philosophical insight would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks.
>
>
>
>
>
> *Russell Collins*
>
> Sr. Software Engineer
>
> McLane Advanced Technology
>
>
>
>
>  --
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this electronic mail
> (email) transmission (including attachments), is intended by MCLANE ADVANCED
> TECHNOLOGIES for the use of the named individual or entity to which it is
> addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential
> and/or protected as a trade secret. It is not intended for transmission to,
> or receipt by, any individual or entity other than the named addressee(s).
> If you have received this email in error, please delete it (including
> attachments) and any copies thereof without printing, copying or forwarding
> it, and notify the sender of the error by email reply immediately.
>
>
>
> --
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this electronic mail
> (email) transmission (including attachments), is intended by MCLANE ADVANCED
> TECHNOLOGIES for the use of the named individual or entity to which it is
> addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential
> and/or protected as a trade secret. It is not intended for transmission to,
> or receipt by, any individual or entity other than the named addressee(s).
> If you have received this email in error, please delete it (including
> attachments) and any copies thereof without printing, copying or forwarding
> it, and notify the sender of the error by email reply immediately.
>