Re: SXC Rework

+1 for all your proposed steps Am 13. September 2024 09:15:04 MESZ schrieb Richard Zowalla : >Hi all, > >to move forward targeting an M3 to get feedback, I would propose, that we do >the following: > >(1) We include https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/1469 with the re-generated >accessors from

Re: SXC Rework

+1 Richard Zowalla schrieb am Fr., 13. Sept. 2024, 16:15: > Hi all, > > to move forward targeting an M3 to get feedback, I would propose, that we > do the following: > > (1) We include https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/1469 with the > re-generated accessors from the Jakarta-moved SXC (source:

Re: SXC Rework

Hi all, to move forward targeting an M3 to get feedback, I would propose, that we do the following: (1) We include https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/1469 with the re-generated accessors from the Jakarta-moved SXC (source: https://github.com/rzo1/sxc) version. Given that metatype.org is gone

Re: SXC Rework

The JAXB RI seems to have removed the code that generates and loads accessor bytecode as the Injector [1] looks like it is unused. So initializing JAXB has probably gotten a lot faster compared to when SXC was introduced in tomee. However, JAXB Context initialization still takes significantly lo

Re: SXC Rework

I think, that Markus did some tests. Maybe he can share? :) > Am 09.09.2024 um 09:48 schrieb Jean-Louis Monteiro : > > Is the performance reason still accurate nowadays? > Someone tested with recent JVMs? > -- > Jean-Louis Monteiro > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro > http://www.tomitribe.com >

Re: SXC Rework

Is the performance reason still accurate nowadays? Someone tested with recent JVMs? -- Jean-Louis Monteiro http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro http://www.tomitribe.com On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 9:30 AM Richard Zowalla wrote: > Any other thoughts? > > > Am 05.09.2024 um 11:08 schrieb Richard Zowalla

Re: SXC Rework

Yes. It is done for startup performance reasons only. At runtime, there is not a big difference. Regarding your points. (1) I think, that metatype.org has expired / is parked at a domain service, so it might not be possible to release SXC under that umbrella (again). We c

Re: SXC Rework

AFAIK sticking to SXC is a decision purely made for startup performance reasons, see David's reply in https://lists.apache.org/thread/09powc11z4rnzvyzmt4xy5bcbrqwkfkh On 03.09.24 13:43, Thomas Andraschko wrote: i thought it in the past that i would be better to get rid of SXC completely but ma

Re: SXC Rework

i thought it in the past that i would be better to get rid of SXC completely but maybe thats a to big task: https://lists.apache.org/thread/0p4m1rw8vmv17l29s1lgclsd9bfrr7s4 Am Di., 3. Sept. 2024 um 13:15 Uhr schrieb Markus Jung : > Hey all, > > > I had to modify the JAXB models in openejb-jee for

SXC Rework

Hey all, I had to modify the JAXB models in openejb-jee for the concurrency 3.0 implementation [1] but noticed the changes were not taken into affect. This is where I found out what openejb-jee-accessors was for. Long story short, I was not able to get the old SXC maven plugin running and R