Ian McCallion wrote:
> >Instead of waiting inside a method, it is more reliable and scaleable to >have the
>container do the waiting and to call your EJB instance when the >message arrives. The
>reasons for this are:
Ashwin Dinakar wrote:
> I don't have an issue with the container do the waiting. How does one do that?
We were talking a cross-purposes. I was describing the nirvana of EJB/JMS integration
while you were describing currently available design options. But we have not yet
reached nirvana, unfortunately:-).
> It was my understanding that JMS is a client-side API.
JMS can be used by clients and EJBs, not just clients.
> In my case one of the clients (the consumer) is an Enterprise Java Bean (a session
>bean) and the producer is an RMI server. I want the consumer to be notified
> asynchronously that there is a message and then proceed to act on the message.
Yes, that is exactly the interesting situation, but it is not possible today for your
consumer to be an EJB unless there is also a real non-EJB client to get things going.
===========================================================================
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".
