2008/3/10, Mario Kofler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > 2008/3/10, David Blevins [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > > > > > > > You could implement serializable on your Entity beans, but it's ill > > advised in almost any situation to have the data passivated with your > > bean as you wind up with a private, detached, copy of the data that > > may be outdated. The rare case may be that you're collecting data > > that has yet to be persisted (never been attached) and therefore > > doesn't live in the EntityManager's cache or database yet, but even > > then you should really be using a transaction which would prevent your > > bean from getting passivated at all so the issue should never arise. > > > > -David > > > so this means i have to manually "turn off" the passivation of my SFSB via > bean managed transactions. but i suppose this means a performance loss :(. > is this problem another issue of the bug mentioned above and so the only > solution is turning off the passivation mechanism? > > further, til now whenever i tried to make some kind of manual transaction > in my beans i always got the error that the container is taking care of the > transactions and bean managed control (transactions) is not allowed. maybe > you can tell me what i have to change to be able to add transactions to > my bean. > > thanks, mario > > > > and even further, is there the possibility to turn off the passivation for SFSB at all in geronimo? like some entry in a deployment descriptor "passivation=false" ?
thanks for helping, mario.
