-
1. Re: JBAS-1974: Remote Connection Factory Usage
adrian.brock Apr 13, 2006 12:58 PM (in response to weston.price)The remoteness should be an extension to the jndi binding.
i.e. Rather than binding the result of ManagedConnectionFactory.getConnectionFactory(...)
you bind a wrapper that understands how to do remote proxying,
including creating proxies for managed objects returned through those proxies.
It shouldn't be in the resource adapters at all. -
2. Re: JBAS-1974: Remote Connection Factory Usage
weston.price Apr 13, 2006 1:07 PM (in response to weston.price)Got it.
How about org.jboss.resource.binding
Move the related artifacts we already have to this package and extend from there? -
3. Re: JBAS-1974: Remote Connection Factory Usage
adrian.brock Apr 13, 2006 1:39 PM (in response to weston.price)I don't care what you call it.
I do care about that it lives in jboss-jca.jar rather than some.rar -
4. Re: JBAS-1974: Remote Connection Factory Usage
weston.price May 5, 2006 2:29 AM (in response to weston.price)Coming along nicely, should be wrapped up, tested etc, etc mid next week.
-
5. Re: JBAS-1974: Remote Connection Factory Usage
weston.price May 9, 2006 2:11 PM (in response to weston.price)In thinking about this some more, augmenting the existing ConnectionFactoryBindingService should be the way to go with all the 'remote' stuff being handled by an internal object to which the MBean just delegates appropriately.
I had planned on making this a seperate MBean that gets generated at deployment time much in the manner of the original WrapperDataSourceService but this seems counterintuitive. As pointed out, this should be a part of the ConnectionFactoryBinding service being that it will be applicable to all ConnectionFactories, not just JDBC based resources.
The internal object will handle the invoke, binding etc, etc for remote enabled ConnectionFactories.
Also, I would like to add to the requirements that we allow for unbinding/binding remote CF's on the fly by setting the useJavaContext MBean attribute. -
6. Re: JBAS-1974: Remote Connection Factory Usage
weston.price May 9, 2006 11:42 PM (in response to weston.price)Further enhancements:
Allow for configurable interceptors that are used when creating the proxy objects. This could be an attribute added to the *-ds.xml file that gets transformed into an array of Strings that are then set on the MBean. Further, an object to interceptors map like structure could be created as well. -
7. Re: JBAS-1974: Remote Connection Factory Usage
weston.price May 11, 2006 10:13 AM (in response to weston.price)For the client side part of the requirement, I am planning on using JBossSerialization that will allow for the serialzing on non-serializable types. Does anyone see any issues with this up front before I go down this route?
-
8. Re: JBAS-1974: Remote Connection Factory Usage
adrian.brock May 11, 2006 11:58 AM (in response to weston.price)The -ds.xml should reference some kind of "shared" proxy factory config
rather than having all config inline. -
9. Re: JBAS-1974: Remote Connection Factory Usage
weston.price May 11, 2006 12:01 PM (in response to weston.price)Excellent. I was heading down this route...thanks for verification.
-
10. Re: JBAS-1974: Remote Connection Factory Usage
clebert.suconic May 11, 2006 12:19 PM (in response to weston.price)"weston.price@jboss.com" wrote:
For the client side part of the requirement, I am planning on using JBossSerialization that will allow for the serialzing on non-serializable types. Does anyone see any issues with this up front before I go down this route?
I don't know if this feature is planned to run on JVM 5, or JVM 1.4.
If JVM 1.4, JBossSerialization won't work on JRockit 1.4, due to a restriction on accessing the hooks I need.
I would need to create instances without using a constructor (I call them Ghost Constructors, don't know a better name), and a way to change final fields.
If you look at cruisecontrol for jboss-serialization we are testing on every VM 1.4+ expect JRockit.
There are no restrictions on JVM 5+.