-
1. Re: EJB communication
sesques May 10, 2004 6:54 AM (in response to cari34)Hi,
Nothing to do, it is the standard behaviour.
Pascal -
2. Re: EJB communication
gorano May 10, 2004 8:03 PM (in response to cari34)Why not using local interfaces?
If you have no intention to split your beans over different JBoss instances
than you have a perfomance loss on using remote.
/G -
3. Re: EJB communication
darranl May 11, 2004 4:46 AM (in response to cari34)you have a perfomance loss on using remote
In what way? JBoss treats them in the same as local interfaces by default anyway. -
4. Re: EJB communication
cari34 May 11, 2004 8:08 AM (in response to cari34)Thank you guys,
It's greate.
Cari. -
5. Re: EJB communication
gorano May 11, 2004 6:57 PM (in response to cari34)Yes you are right, JBoss pass-by-reference if the remote interface is on the same machine, and this is particular to JBoss, as I understand it
(I take my comment about "performance loss" back).
However you might consider the following differences between remote and local:
1. No need to catch remote exceptions when using local.
2. This will free callers from dependence on the EJB API. N ot a big deal but...
3. portability to less clever ejb containers (where we have pass-by-value).
4. Security! Data is never directly accessible outside the container via port 1099.
I had to find some advantages of using local interfaces so I can justify
my own use of them ;-))
Cheers
Goran