On Wed, 8 Aug 2001 17:38, Michael Bachran wrote: > What about a locking mechanism in Avalon? Can it be imlemented based of an > object pool? > Or is there already one?
Not sure what you mean exactly ;) Avalon/Excalibur has a Component pool and has separate locks (in concurrent package) but I don't think thats what you are getting at? > > I don't know the specifics (as I said not an EJB guy really) but > > I believe > > weblogic offers the ability to enter "T3 startup classes" that > > can be mapped > > into JNDI space somehow. (No idea what that means though). There > > is at least > > one group I know of who use parts of Avalon/Phoenix and James in > > this way. I > > don't know the specifics or even if it is a good solution. > > > > Hopefully when the Services JSR actually starts Avalon will also offer > > Services JSR? What's that about? Basically an effort to standardize an API like Avalon/Phoenix and brand it as part of J2EE. > > > Actually I am more interested in JMS than in EJB. How does JMS > > > > match with > > > > > Avalon? > > > > JMS could be integrated with Avalon and work well but isn't at > > the moment. I > > see JMS as no different from other resources (ie see SocketManager, or > > ConnectionManager). > > So you don't see the neccessity to use it? In certain cases it would be great and less so in other cases ... I guess I can't see much difference between it JDBC, vanilla sockets, etc in terms of "necessity". > > I would implement a MessagingManager interface that did all the > > JNDI magic > > behind it and just gave you basic access to > > topics/queues/sessions/whatevers > > via a simple interface. > > What about combining the MessagingManager interface with a > JNDIComponentManager (as Jeffs mentioned)? That could work ;) > > > >Maybe there might be an interface a block can > > > implement that makes tha block able to send and consume messages? > > > > Probably like ConnectionHandler (consumer of connections) in the > > ConnectionManager setup? > > Hmmm... Yes! Maybe a 'DefaultMessagingManager' might become member of a > component that wants to communicate through the MessagingManager Iterface. > I am not sure about the seperation. Maybe I need a JMSConnectionHandler. > Maybe I want two seperate iterfaces for sending and consuming. I don't know > jet. me neither - I think the only way to find out would be to experiment and see what works ;) Cheers, Pete *-----------------------------------------------------* | "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, | | and proving that there is no need to do so - almost | | everyone gets busy on the proof." | | - John Kenneth Galbraith | *-----------------------------------------------------* --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
