They do acomplish the same thinig, just using different interface contracts. I could go into the details but they are horribly borring. Please read the Application Server Framework section of the JMS 1.0.2b spec and compare to the JCA inbound stuff.
On 8/2/06, Paul French <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think understand what you are saying but I also thought JCA 1.5 relied on app server or lightweight contanier to provide a thread pool (work manager I believe) so that the app server is still in control of all the threads being created. What's the difference? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/connections-or-sessions-tf2039029.html#a5616344 Sent from the ActiveMQ - User forum at Nabble.com.
-- Regards, Hiram Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
