This content has been marked as final. Show 3 replies
AFAIR, you shouldn't be passing arround Remote objects.
Could you clarify, why argument type Account is not RMI/IIOP? I've supposed that value has to be passed by reference, but it not so ...
Lets see ejb 2.1 specification section 7.11.5
The methods defined in this interface must follow the rules for RMI/IIOP. This means that their argument and return values must be of valid types for RMI/IIOP, and their throws clauses must include the java.rmi.RemoteException
20. The EJB technology Specification says that the return value and argument types for finder, create and business methods must be legal types for RMI-IIOP. What exactly is a legal type for RMI-IIOP?
A legal type for RMI-IIOP is defined in the Java Language Mapping to OMG IDL Specification. Refer to the "RMI/IDL Subset of Java" platform section of this document for full details. It's not a great deal different from that of RMI although there are a few exceptions, most notably a "Value Type". A type that will be passed by value may not implement java.rmi.Remote , as this could cause confusion between value types and Remote Interfaces.
I don't understand why i have problems with RMI arguments.....
There is no limitations for this according to specifications.