Hi Ian!
I wanted to know if the idea of timeout objects would be a good thing to
include in the EJB. Instead of implementing it ourselves , the framework
itself should support all chained beans timing out together using timeout
object.
Regards
Ravi
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian McCallion [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 1999 23:35
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: APM and stateful session beans
>
> RAVIKHANDELWAL wrote:
>
> > Regarding stateful session bean chaining, why can't we have all beans
> > timeout together. The first stateful bean can create a timeout object
> and
> > this timeout object can be propagated to all subsequent stateful session
> > beans just like what Sun has done with transactions. That way we don't
> have
> > to worry about any intermediate bean timing out? Comments ..?
>
> First these things cannot happen together and even a millisecond is
> sufficient
> for one bean to do something irreparable that assumes the existance of the
> timed-out bean.
>
> Second, timeout objects don't (yet) exist in EJB.
>
> Loosely coupled architectures are possible and they do utilise timeout
> objects,
> but they also require event mechanisms (such as JMS) and EJB is not (yet)
> integrated with events.
>
> Ian McCallion
>
> ==========================================================================
> =
> 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".
