View this message in context:
http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/Different-module-share-same-container-tp4657507p4657536.html
Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
est rather than a unit test. Maybe
you could create a new maven module just for running unit/integration tests
against your other modules and use a single container.
--
View this message in context:
http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/Different-module-share-same-container-tp4657507p4657535.html
work. Only have to add in the codes directly when getting
> InitialContext.
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/Different-module-share-same-container-tp4657507p4657523.html
> Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
n the codes directly when getting
InitialContext.
--
View this message in context:
http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/Different-module-share-same-container-tp4657507p4657523.html
Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
yeah, you're right. It feel better in this way.
Thanks for the correction. :)
However, any idea on the container share?
--
View this message in context:
http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/Different-module-share-same-container-tp4657507p4657522.html
Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing
will event cost less on server.
>
> Anyway, the time cost will increase with the number of sub-modules of the
> project. Is there anyway to avoid it?
> Thanks :)
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/Different-module-share-same-container-tp4657507p4657520.html
> Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
nyway, the time cost will increase with the number of sub-modules of the
project. Is there anyway to avoid it?
Thanks :)
--
View this message in context:
http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/Different-module-share-same-container-tp4657507p4657520.html
Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing list
ondering whether it's possible to initialize only once. That will
> reduce the time.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/Different-module-share-same-container-tp4657507p4657517.html
> Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
nly cost on the initialization, so
I'm wondering whether it's possible to initialize only once. That will
reduce the time.
--
View this message in context:
http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/Different-module-share-same-container-tp4657507p4657517.html
Sent from the OpenEJB Use
Oh~ sorry, I thought the post is failed due to the subscription issue. So I
recreated the thread...
--
View this message in context:
http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/Different-module-share-same-container-tp4657507p4657515.html
Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
gt; cost
> > more time initializing the container.
> >
> > So is it possible that different modules share the same container? Use
> one
> > centralized jndi.properties to replace all.
> > Do anyone have the idea?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> >
> http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/Different-module-share-same-container-tp4657507.html
> > Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
>
to replace all.
> Do anyone have the idea?
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/Different-module-share-same-container-tp4657507.html
> Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
lized jndi.properties to replace all.
Do anyone have the idea?
Thanks,
--
View this message in context:
http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/Different-module-share-same-container-tp4657507.html
Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
13 matches
Mail list logo