Hey
Peter Michael wrote:
> > Async calls are cool, but do they really belong in the EJB
> > spec? Many async
>
> Where else? In my opinion, if it is a framework thing, it
> belongs into the spec.
But is it something that affects the contract between the bean and the
container? IMHO no, since it can be added "on top" of JMS (or whatever
you fancy as underlying protocol).
> > features can be implemented with a client-side library on top
> > of RMI, which
> > would work for distributed Java objects in general, instead
> > of just EJB. Of
>
> One major issue for us is that which simulated async EJB calls,
> you cannot get multiple replies.
Why not? If the call to the bean has a callback, the EJB can call it
several times if it wants to.
> > course, there is some benefit to standardizing the "poll" and
> > "callback"
> > interfaces of a generic async library, but this could be done
> > as a separate
> > spec which leverages RMI.
>
> Yes, general async RMI would really be nice.
Yes, but since it doesn't affect the interface between the container and
the bean/client why add it to the EJB spec?
/Rickard
--
Rickard �berg
@home: +46 13 177937
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage: http://www-und.ida.liu.se/~ricob684
===========================================================================
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".
