Dave,
I am willing to discuss it offline. This issue -- and the
no-alternate-config issue in general -- has been particularly sticky one
both on the EJB experts list and in <vendor>JRun's recent passing of the CTS
tests under our J2EE license</vendor>. Licensing has made it clear that
alternate configurations such as these are not permissable and violate CTS;
this draconian rule will be unnecessary with the advent of local entities in
the next spec, but is nevertheless a rule at the moment. I do not feel
comfortable sharing experts list and cts list threads in this forum, but am
happy to converse directly with you.
-Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: A mailing list for Enterprise JavaBeans development
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dave Wolf
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 5:14 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: If the EJBs are on the local machine will it avoid making
rem ote calls?
Sean,
Can you show me where in the cts specification it forbids containers from
having custom enhancements? I have never seen such a test in the cts, that
is to say, a test which checks whether a container has a feature, which is
non-compliant, yet is disables during the test run. Rather the cts is a
"one way" test that does not check such boundries. What I mean is that if
the app server is configured in a complaint way such that the cts does
properly run, it does not then say that the container may therefore not have
such features. I think you will find that there are many containers which
have fully passed the cts which indeed do have switches which if enables
would not be compliant.
The following vendors are J2EE branded, and have thus passed the CTS
ATG
BEA
Bluestone
Borland
Hitachi
Iona
iPlanet
SilverStream
Sybase
I can assure you that many such containers do have switches to do things
like 1) Allow for pass by reference 2) Allow for re-entrant calls, etc.
Each of the above vendors are not just "compliant:" yet are 100% branded
servers, each of whom has run and passed the cts, along with the remaining
licensing options as part of J2EE branding. I do not say they all have such
toggles, but I believe you will find many do.
I would be quite interested to see the section in either the J2EE 1.2
specification or the cts suite which checks for the existinance of such
disabled features.
Dave Wolf
Internet Applications Division
Sybase
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sean Neville" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 4:26 PM
Subject: Re: If the EJBs are on the local machine will it avoid making rem
ote calls?
> I think you're misunderstanding. Those who are officially certified can
NOT
> offer this as an option, toggled or not. It cannot be anywhere in the
> server, and users should know that. Please understand there is a
difference
> between spec compliance and official CTS compliance. CTS compliance
> completely forbids alternate configurations in the server core, even as
> optional possibilities.
>
> psn
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: A mailing list for Enterprise JavaBeans development
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Alex Smith
> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 3:04 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: If the EJBs are on the local machine will it avoid making
> rem ote calls?
>
>
> Sean Neville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >No server that has sucessfully passed CTS 1.2 -- official certification
> >based on that suite of 6,000+ tests, not certification based on
subjective
> >interpretation of adherence to the specs -- can make use of
> >passing objects by reference. This optimization is strictly disallowed,
> > >not a permissable value-add. That's not to say it isn't valuable, and
> > >non-compliant servers do have an advantage there. It's just to say that
> > >if you're using a certified app server, don't expect this local
> > >optimization.
>
> While this is true, many (if not all) vendors that do offer this feature
> make it an option that can be toggled. Furthermore if these vendors choose
> the default value of this switch to be "pass by value", I think they're
> kidding themselves and their technical support as well as newsgroups will
> testify to that. Same goes for the "threads and I/O not allowed" rule. The
> bottom line is that when I am recommending an application server to the
> client, I will always choose one that offers these optimizations and
relaxes
> spec restrictions, what with paranoid spec writers and all.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Alex Smith
> Insight LLC
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
>
===========================================================================
> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the
body
> of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
>
>
===========================================================================
> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the
body
> of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
>
>
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
