Hi John,
<vendor>
We recognize the value of replication for stateful session beans and have
plans to support this in a future release. I cannot tell you exactly when
we will support this (contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more info).
</vendor>
Of course, stateful session beans are not intended to be shared among
multiple clients...
Hope this helps,
Robert
At 05:05 PM 4/18/00 -0400, you wrote:
>The data is transient and does not require a entity bean.
>
>Inprise does provide this now, and I was curious what WebLogic's take on the
>issue was. Thank you.
>
>JohnH
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: A mailing list for Enterprise JavaBeans development
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Chris Raber
>Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2000 4:41 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: failover of stateful session beans in WebLogic
>
>
>John,
>
>Perhaps you could clarify your requirements. The title of the original post
>refers to failover of stateful session beans, while your recent message says
>you want failover for an object "shared by many clients".
>
>If it is the latter you are after, perhaps an Entity Bean or an object
>backed up by a direct Java persistence mechanism is what you are looking
>for?
>
>Regards,
>
>-Chris.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Hogan [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2000 4:02 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: failover of stateful session beans in WebLogic
> >
> > Thanks for the response Bill. The servlet session is not that well suited
> > for a particular need we have because it is user specific. We need
> > failover
> > protection for an object shared by many clients.
> >
> > JohnH
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: A mailing list for Enterprise JavaBeans development
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Louth, William (Exchange)
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2000 3:50 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: failover of stateful session beans in WebLogic
> >
> >
> > while looking a the docs I noticed something that caught my attention
> > before:
> >
> > <web-logic-docs>
> > By embedding a simple Java expression in the WLQL string, you can convert
> > the supplied maxBal value to another currency before querying the RDBMS.
> > For
> > example, if maxBal is supplied in U.S. dollars and the conversion rate to
> > pounds is 1.6483, you can use a simple expression to multiply the value:
> > <finder>
> > <method-name>findSomeAccounts</method-name>
> > <method-params>
> > <method-param>double</method-param>
> > <method-param>string</method-param>
> > </method-params>
> > <finder-query>(& (< balance $0) (= owner $1))</finder-query>
> > <finder-expression>
> > <expression-number>0</expression-number>
> > <expression-text>@0 * 1.6483</expression-text>
> > <expression-type>long</expression-type>
> > </finder-expression>
> > </finder>
> >
> > In the above example, $0 is replaced by the Java expression @0 * 1.6483,
> > which multiplies the value of maxBal by 1.6483. Because the EJB provider
> > did
> > not override the value of $1, WLQL maps $1 to the second parameter in the
> > finder method signature, ownerID.
> >
> > A more advanced version of this finder could use Java to determine the
> > conversion rate when converting maxBal:
> > <finder-expression>
> > <expression-number>0</expression-number>
> > <expression-text>@0 *
> > Double.parseDouble(System.getProperties().get("rate.pounds.dollars"))</exp
> > re
> > ssion-text>
> > <expression-type>long</expression-type>
> > </finder-expression>
> >
> > </web-logic-docs>
> >
> > I previously posted a message regarding improving and standardizing the
> > finder syntax and was hoping for some feedback but alas none came. So I
> > will
> > *ignite* the issue again in this thread. Question: Is it just me but have
> > the web logic guys just totally lost it. I am all for impoving the
> > capabilities of the syntax like accessing a field within an object passed
> > across as a parameter (based on java beans design pattern) but I think we
> > are starting to push things just the the edge of silliness when we allow
> > for
> > the syntax to include :
> > Double.parseDouble(System.getProperties().get("rate.pounds.dollars"))
> > while
> > still keeping the ridiculus prefix notation : >(& (< balance $0) (= owner
> > $1)). Maybe I am old fashion but should not the finder syntax reasonable
> > SQL
> > considering that most ejb installations will have a relational database
> > backend and most deployers would have knowledge of this over Java's api. I
> > think the web logic server team's time would have been better spent in
> > getting rid of the crappy prefix syntax - *we are not computers and do not
> > process instructions this way*.
> >
> > To the web logic users who have used the features mentioned above. Could
> > you
> > tell me why not include the * 1.6483 in the original query syntax is this
> > some limitation which was addressed in this convulated way or just an
> > example demonstrating a unwarranted feature.
> >
> > William Louth
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Louth, William (Exchange)
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2000 8:29 PM
> > > To: 'A mailing list for Enterprise JavaBeans development'
> > > Subject: RE: failover of stateful session beans in WebLogic
> > >
> > > as per the web logic 5.1 documentation
> > >
> > > http://www.weblogic.com/docs51/classdocs/API_ejb/EJB_environment.html
> > >
> > > ===========================================
> > > Stateful session EJBs
> > >
> > > Stateful session EJBs can utilize cluster-aware home stubs by setting
> > > home-is-clusterable to "true." This provides failover and load balancing
> > > for stateful EJB lookups. Stateful session EJBs cannot utilize
> > > replica-aware EJBObject stubs, and WebLogic Server does not provide
> > > failover services for method calls to stateful session EJBs.
> > >
> > > If you require cluster failover services for stateful objects, consider
> > > implementing the stateful session EJB as a servlet. Servlets can
> > maintain
> > > state through failover in a cluster using either JDBC, an operating
> > system
> > > file, or directly in memory. See Using session tracking from a servlet
> > for
> > > more information.
> > >
> > > ===========================================
> > >
> > > I do not have any idea if there are plans. I suspose this will come with
> > > the next release possibly next year (ejb 2.0) since this release has
> > still
> > > to come out of beta.
> > >
> > > William Louth
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: John Hogan [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2000 8:00 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: failover of stateful session beans in WebLogic
> > >
> > > All,
> > >
> > > This feature seems to be missing from WebLogic and their documentation
> > > suggests achieving failover protection using servlet/session. Am I
> > > understanding this right, and does anyone have information on WebLogic's
> > > plans to support stateful session bean failover? Thanks.
> > >
> > > JohnH
> > >
> > >
> > ==========================================================================
> > > =
> > > 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".
> >
> >
> > ***********************************************************************
> > Bear Stearns is not responsible for any recommendation, solicitation,
> > offer or agreement or any information about any transaction, customer
> > account or account activity contained in this communication.
> > ***********************************************************************
> >
> > ==========================================================================
> > =
> > 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".
===========================================================================
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".
