This content has been marked as final.
Show 5 replies
-
1. Re: @Local and @Remote version of the same interface?
elkner Apr 14, 2006 11:03 PM (in response to lhoriman)"lhoriman" wrote:
Because I wanna make sure, that at the server the method params are passed as reference and thus avoid the serialization overhead ... ?
Why would you ever want a bean with identical Local and Remote interfaces? -
2. Re: @Local and @Remote version of the same interface?
lhoriman Apr 15, 2006 4:14 AM (in response to lhoriman)"elkner" wrote:
"lhoriman" wrote:
Because I wanna make sure, that at the server the method params are passed as reference and thus avoid the serialization overhead ... ?
Why would you ever want a bean with identical Local and Remote interfaces?
Which would only be the case on an appserver that did not perform the most obvious performance optimization, right?
Jeff -
3. Re: @Local and @Remote version of the same interface?
lhoriman Jul 30, 2006 12:57 AM (in response to lhoriman)I'm finding that even in-process, @Remote interfaces result in serialization.
Isn't JBoss supposed to detect this case and optimize out the serialization?
Thanks,
Jeff -
4. Re: @Local and @Remote version of the same interface?
epbernard Aug 1, 2006 2:40 PM (in response to lhoriman)I think it's against the J2EE compliance. But there might be a flag I'm not aware of
-
5. Re: @Local and @Remote version of the same interface?
lhoriman Aug 1, 2006 5:36 PM (in response to lhoriman)"epbernard" wrote:
I think it's against the J2EE compliance. But there might be a flag I'm not aware of
Yep, I'm pretty sure that optimization would violate the J2EE spec... but that's what I like about JBoss, it usually does the smart thing instead of the stupid Sun-approved thing :-)
Jeff