Thank you for your response. However, if you look in my original post, I
explained that: anonymous wrote : "As part of the migration from 2.1 to 3.0, I
am using the @LocalBinding annotation to ensure that the JNDI names of the
migrated and un-migrated session beans stay consistent." This mean
I'm using JBoss 5.1 and have an EJB 2.1 application that I'm migrating to EJB
3.0. In this application, there are stateless session beans that expose two
different interfaces. For example, there is a bean called UserServiceBean
which has a local interface called UserServiceLocal and another lo
This is an existing, working EJB2.1 application. I added an EJB3-style bean
and JBoss started ignoring the JNDI names specified using the
tag in jboss.xml.
I was able to "fix" the problem by removing the EJB3 bean and reverting my
ejb-jar.xml to it's earlier state.
Does this mean that EJB2
It looks as if I'm going to need to override the JNDI names for my existing
EJB2 beans as well. It seems that JBoss is ignoring the entries in
jboss.xml, and is giving default names to all of the old-style beans.
The @LocalBinding annotation doesn't work in this case.
Any help with the right
Thanks for the quick reply! I appreciate your help.
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4252357#4252357
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4252357
___
jb
I'm using JBossAS 5.1.0 and have just upgraded the Eclipse projects for an
existing application to support EJB3. I then converted one of the session
beans in the app to an EJB3-style declaration. I've been able to successfully
call this bean if I use JBoss' default JNDI name for the bean.
No
