They always say this.
Not only IronFlare guys say this, i see oracle also says the same thing!!
" An update will follow shortly after the initial version and will bring
the product into full compliance with the J2EE 1.3 specification. This
update will primarily focus on providing providing fea
I've been told by pretty good sources that it's coming in the next release.
Unfortunately they could give me a solid answer on when this next release will
be, other than "soon" :)
--- Dan Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does anyone know if/when full EJB2.0 / J2EE1.3 support will be availab
Orion only supports a partial ejb2.0 spec - an older one at that. I don't believe it
supports
many-many out of the boxmore ejb2.0 coming up!
--- Christoph Sturm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> I'm trying to get some cmp2.0 beans with relations running on orion
> 1.5.2.
>
>
> I hav
I understand that BEA will support it in version 6 which should be
available real-soon-now.
Steven
-Original Message-
From: satish.gunda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 8:44 AM
To: orion-interest
Subject: RE: EJB 2.0 Approved
Has it been declared
I'm pretty sure Orion does not perform their version of "EJBLocal" without
setting in the orion-ejb-jar of the
EJB. Setting this attribute will stop objects from being serialized passed
between the EJB and the client. I am 99.9% sure that Orion does not perform
this function without the attri
It's still officially in PFD status but will be approved with the release of J2EE 1.3
coming out,
as I understand it. I believe BEA rolled it out with WebLogic 6.1. Pramati has it too.
Others will
roll it out in the upcoming months - I assume Orion will be one of them.
--- "GUNDA, Satish / RSAI
ubject: RE: EJB 2.0
Approved
Has
it been declared approved formally? Or does the ballots suggest that it is
going to be approved?
Has
any of the app server vendors come out with plans in rolling out their EJB2.0
servers?
Satish
-Original Message-From
Has it
been declared approved formally? Or does the ballots suggest that it is going to
be approved?
Has
any of the app server vendors come out with plans in rolling out their EJB2.0
servers?
Satish
-Original Message-From: Solinsky, Jason
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Mond
I have empirically observed a very high penalty on each call I make through
a remote interface in the same JVM in 1.5.2. I haven't attempted to figure
out how things are actually implemented, but something very expensive is
happening each time a same-VM call is made.
JWS
-Original Message---
If
anybody is at JAOO this week, please ask Karl about this.
Regards,
the
elephantwalker
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Solinsky,
JasonSent: Monday, September 10, 2001 12:01 AMTo:
Orion-InterestSubject: EJB 2.0 Appr
Since, according to the JCP, at http://jcp.org/jsr/stage/proposed.jsp the
EJB 2.0 spec is currently in Proposed Final Draft Status and, according to
the EJB 2.0 JSR Detail, the Final Ballot on the Reference Implementation
(RI) and Compatibility Technology Kit (CTK) does not come until 04
September
Confirmed!
--- Ray Harrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is actually semi-difficult to validate at the Sun site - the specs page for the
>EJB spec
> still list the pfd2 as the latest. Nothing that I have been able to find says "Yes -
>the spec
> has
> been finalized". They have included the
This is actually semi-difficult to validate at the Sun site - the specs page for the
EJB spec
still list the pfd2 as the latest. Nothing that I have been able to find says "Yes -
the spec has
been finalized". They have included the spec in the latest release of j2EE 1.3
beta(2)...I am
somewhat
Finally! This is very good news indeed!
--- Simon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The JCP just approved the EJB 2.0 specification. Read the article here:
>
> http://www.crn.com/sections/BreakingNews/breakingnews.asp?ArticleID=28281
>
__
Do Yo
Vincent,
OrionServer 1.5.2 is EJB2.0 Proposed Final Draft 1 compliant (i think there
may be some PFD2 "things" in there as well) but, i don't believe much more is
going to be completed towards the 2.0 spec until the 2.0 spec is final. Therein
lies the partiality of the EJB2.0 support.
peace -
Title: RE: ejb 2.0 proposed final draft #2 is out
Ooops,
my bad.
-AP_
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Alex
ParanskySent: Friday, April 27, 2001 12:37 PMTo:
Orion-InterestSubject: RE: ejb 2.0 proposed final draft #2 is
Title: RE: ejb 2.0 proposed final draft #2 is out
I'm
still reading but here is what I'm learning:
Dependent objects (as they were in PFD1) are gone. They have been
replaced
with
something called a local view. An entity bean may have either a
remote
view
or a local view, bu
Appendix E Revision History - E12 Proposed Final Draft 2
--- Alex Paransky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> RE: ejb 2.0 proposed final draft #2 is outI read the spec, and still saw the
> Dependent Objects in there. Where does it say that the DOs are gone?
>
> -AP_
>
Title: RE: ejb 2.0 proposed final draft #2 is out
I read
the spec, and still saw the Dependent Objects in there. Where does it say
that the DOs are gone?
-AP_
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Russ
WhiteSent: Friday, April
Title: RE: ejb 2.0 proposed final draft #2 is out
Am I
the only one that think the following makes more sense?
EJBObject -> Local interface
RemoteEJBObject -> Remote interface
as
opposed to
EJBObject -> Remote interface
EJBLocalObject -> Local interface
Isn't
is
Title: RE: ejb 2.0 proposed final draft #2 is out
Here is the section that says what is different between
PFD 1 and 2:
E.12 Proposed Final Draft 2
Introduced local interfaces and local home interfaces for entity beans and session beans.
Added characterization of local client view.
Added
I'm no expert either. I have just started. Anyway, it seems like your are
mixing some concepts here (IMHO).
It seems like your trying to "normalize" your bean by having a foreign key
(jobid) to Job. This, should be a reference to the class, i.e.
public abstract setJob(Job ajob) not an integer. If
I'm probably way out of my league when I saying
this.
java.lang.Integer is a lot bigger than an int.
An Integer object could easily handle a SQLBIG_INT, and therefore you should use
int instead of Integer for this type of operation.
Cannot stress enough the fact that I'm probably on
ver
Thanks, Jeff for your many informative posts.
I checked out the ServerTest.zip you posted and it seems my files look
pretty much like yours. I noticed you had entered the abstract schema names
of your beans, which I had not, in expectation that it would make no
difference. I have now added such n
Unidirectional 1-1 and 1-n relationships between EJBs work, but
bidirectional relationships do not. There are easy ways to fake it,
though.
It's not strictly according to the specification - with Orion, you must
define the CMR fields as s in the . pd2 and pdf say
you shouldn't. This may have b
Title: RE: EJB 2.0 CMP features of Orion
1:1 and 1:N between two ejb's works fine. The only difference
is in the tags where you describe the second
bean in the relationship.
For a dependent:
many
Address
For an ejb:
many
Contact
The and s
Hi Folks,
minor typos found in readme.txt:
1. setting of server.xml
should be
"X:\Orion-test-apps\Test20CmpDoOM\rel\Sample20EbDoOM-ver001a.ear"
^^
instead of
"X:\Orion-test-apps\Test20CmpDoOM\rel\Sample20EbDo-ver001a.ear"
2. sett
Hi All,
JA> As promised, the EJB 2.0 CMP example with 1 to many EB to dependent
JA> relationships is available. Its posted at:
Thanks for this good example, Jim!
I have a question: I played with DOs and orion a few months ago,
and had some problems:
How do I remove DO's? Simply DO.remove() t
I beleive it is possible. First, in the cas of a one-to-many design, you
will get two tables. One for persons and the other for addresses. I'll have
that example ready very soon, probably tonight.
Also, I *believe* orion allows you to control the table names and such. Of
course, thats a server
Just ran your tutorial, had no problems at all setting it up with Orion
1.4.5. Thank you, it was very informative.
Is it possible to do something like this if it spans multiple tables? What
if you had a 1-many relationship and a user could have many addresses. In
the database there would be a U
thanks for the response.
artie
Quoting Tim Drury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Search back through the archives. There are several
> examples and questions w/ answers. If that doesn't
> answer your questions (and the one in your previous
> post regarding 1:1), then post just the pertinent
> parts
Search back through the archives. There are several
examples and questions w/ answers. If that doesn't
answer your questions (and the one in your previous
post regarding 1:1), then post just the pertinent
parts of you code for us to look at.
All I know that has been implemented is EJB 2.0 draf
Title: RE: ejb 2.0 relations in orion 1.4.3 broken ?
Hi Alex,
well, the ATM needs to be updated a bit.
Its descriptor is stuck somewhere between 1.1 and 2.0 during that it has been updated as the 2.0 implementation progressed.
Hopefully, I will get time to do this this weekend.
WR
EEK!
Axel, I have not yet tried to verify this and am not dure how to work
around it, but if you are sure please Bugzilla it as soon as possible. I
was just reviewing the bug list and saw that Magnus seems to be making
excellent progress in cleaning up the EJB 2.0 persistence manager relat
gt; Jeff Schnitzer
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: John D'Ausilio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 8:40 AM
>> To: Orion-Interest
>> Subject: RE: EJB 2.0 Dependent bidirectional relationships
0 8:40 AM
> To: Orion-Interest
> Subject: RE: EJB 2.0 Dependent bidirectional relationships not working
>
>
> I can't even get bidirectional relationships between beans
> working here ...
>
> I have a simple one-many relationship, collection in the
>
I have a one-to-one bidirectional relationship between two entity beans
that appears to be working correctly. Orion creates a LONGBINARY field in
Hypersonac to represent the EB reference and stores some value in there. It
seems to be working on both sides.
I also have a one-to-many bidirection
I can't even get bidirectional relationships between beans working here ...
I have a simple one-many relationship, collection in the parent, parent
object in the child. When deployed, it correctly puts the backreference
field in the child, but never fills it in with the parent's objectID
has any
THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!
That was the problem! I sure wish I had seen that. I compared my
descriptor to the sample many times and missed that each time. I guess
thats what I get for working all night ;-)
Seriousely Earl, I can't thank you enough!
I no
Jim,
Try adding a field-name tag in your dependent cmp-field declarations:
addrDo
Test20CmpDo.eb.AddrDo
street
city
state
zip
I can't remember how I discovered t
I noticed that you're missing the element in the
block. That might not be your problem, though; when I comment
mine out I can still successfully deploy my solution. If adding
does nothing, I'll look again.
I haven't been using dependent objects because I couldn't figure out
from the spec how
ot;Orion-Interest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 7:29 AM
Subject: RE: EJB 2.0 1-1 mapping entity-depobj problem
>
> I had to put in 2.x in
> the area for my ejb2.0 stuff to be
> recognized by Orion. I did NOT need the 2.0 DTD.
>
> -tim
>
>
Thank you very much. That was indeed the problem.
-joel
- Original Message -
From: "Kris Keener" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Orion-Interest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 6:10 AM
Subject: Re: EJB 2.0 1-1 mapping entity-depobj proble
I had to put in 2.x in
the area for my ejb2.0 stuff to be
recognized by Orion. I did NOT need the 2.0 DTD.
-tim
> -Original Message-
> From: Joel Shellman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 6:00 AM
> To: Orion-Interest
> Subject: EJB 2.0 1-1 mapping entity-d
Joel,
Did you declare "prefs" as a cmp-field in the
entity declaration? For example:
...
prefs
...
I was getting the same exception until I made the
above change.
--- Joel Shellman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I get the following error during deployment:
>
> "Method
Title: RE: EJB 2.0's Message Driven Beans in Orion 1.2.9 ?
Where
does this code exist? I have downloaded the latest orion from the website
and done an autoupdate. Please advise.
James
-Original Message-From: Magnus Rydin
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Wednesday, Septemb
There is a package in Orion distribution
/applications/atm.ear
What version of Orion do you have now? Orion prints it to the console when
starts.
To update your Orion server to the latest version (now 1.3.5) type
java -jar autoupdate.jar
and restart Orion.
stas@
> -Original Message-
> F
Title: RE: EJB 2.0's Message Driven Beans in Orion 1.2.9 ?
Take a look at the EJB 2.0 version of ATM.
It has an message driven bean.
> -Original Message-
> From: Olli Pöyry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: den 13 september 2000 09:38
> To: Orion-Interest
>
> Is there any example or documentation about message driven EJB's (which
> should be in Orion 1.2.9)?
> Or is Sun's documentation about EJB 2.0 all there is to it?
Have a look at messagelogger in the demo directory.
In a peanutshell, a message bean...
- is similar to a session bean.
- has
the version 1.3.1 is supposed to support ejb2.0 style entity beans according to the site. that would mean i suppose support for virtual cmp and cmr fields, abstract entitybean class etc., But i get deployment errors looks like we are still stuck with ejb 1.1 types entity beans after all!
-krishnan
Title: RE: EJB 2.0 status.
Hi!
It seems to me that EJB 2.0 support was added in Orion
1.1.2x or something near. Update to latest version and check your ejb-jar.xml
for DOCTYPE tag. It must reffer to correct dtd.
With
best wishes,
Simon
Salykov.
-Original Message-From
Title: RE: EJB 2.0 status.
Hi
could some body tell me which version of orion supports some of ejb2.0 features. are these features relating to entity bean relation ship?
I have a problem .
i am using orion 1.0.3b latest stable version. As specified in ejb2.0 specifications that we have to
ll be MediaPlan has no field
campaign and Campaign EJB has Collection of MediaPlan.
Best wishes,
Simon Salykov.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Yann Doussot
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 8:27 PM
To: Orion-Interest
Subject: RE: EJB 2.0 s
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Simon Salykov wrote:
> Hi, Yann!
>
> Your relation description is incorrect. "campaign-has-mediaplan" role
> source's multiplicity must be one and "mediaplan_belongsto_campaign"
> source's multiplicity must be many. Because one campaign has many media
> plans. Try it.
ith best wishes,
Simon Salykov.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Yann Doussot
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 11:41 AM
To: Orion-Interest
Subject: RE: EJB 2.0 status.
On Mon, 28 Aug 2000, Simon Salykov wrote:
Here is the description
On Mon, 28 Aug 2000, Simon Salykov wrote:
> Hi!
>
> We are now deploying our applications using EJB 2.0 draft specification.
> We've discovered some bugs with dependents implementation (such as
> deployment fail on application with dependent containing cmp fields that
> must be serialized). Also
Hi!
We are now deploying our applications using EJB 2.0 draft specification.
We've discovered some bugs with dependents implementation (such as
deployment fail on application with dependent containing cmp fields that
must be serialized). Also all bugs discovered in EJB 1.1 implementation
presents
Great, Karl, thanks...
I realize your not obligated to support the EJB 2.0 draft implementation or
provide much in the way of docs, but I'm guessing that your development
staff probably has put together at least one EJB 2.0 app with entity beans
and deployment descriptors, just for testing. Wo
Hello Jim,
Yeah, that's a safe assumption. More details will follow with the "official"
release of it. It still does not support the EJB-QL though.
Regards,
Karl Avedal
Jim Archer wrote:
> Its safe ti assume, then, that the 1.2.0 binary posted for DL on the web
> site has some 2.0 draft spec s
Its safe ti assume, then, that the 1.2.0 binary posted for DL on the web
site has some 2.0 draft spec support?
--On Monday, August 14, 2000 6:31 AM -0400 "Joseph B. Ottinger"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The dev versions (1.1.37+ at the very least) have early EJB 2.0, although
> not EQL.
>
>
The dev versions (1.1.37+ at the very least) have early EJB 2.0, although
not EQL.
On Mon, 14 Aug 2000, NomadIQ wrote:
> Hello,
> Does Orion group planning to support EJB2.0 specs,If yes when it will be ?
> Thank you,
>
> --
> Elena Neroslavsk
Title: RE: EJB 2.0
Hi.
You have been able to use some of the EJB 2.0 specs for some time now.
Although as the spec is still a draft, this has not been publically anounced, and will not be until Orion supports the full EJB 2.0 spec I guess..
Some things are still lacking, such as EJB QL
Yes, it comes with a HTTP server and also supports JSP and servlet. The only
thing discouraging is its price tag.
"Kalvar, Kirk" wrote:
>
> And the dumb question. Does BEA Weblogic support a web container in its
> server?
Yes, it comes with a HTTP server and also supports JSP and servlet. The
An observation and a dumb question. First I looked extensively at
application servers and was amazed at how much marketing hype was applied
and how little real technical information they contained on how exactly how
they conformed to the J2EE standard. Additionally I was looking for a
server tha
64 matches
Mail list logo
