The spec snippet appears to be saying the 'remote' needs to be capable of processing multiple requests at the same time, and that is what the container does. The issue we're talking about is the implementation of the stub on the client side.
It's sort of multiple requests from one client (stub thread safety) vs multiple requests from multiple clients (remote object implementation thread safety). It would be interesting to understand what the actual implementation issue with the stubs might be. I also think it is very interesting that none of the vendors have chimed in about how their products work here. So far our single reference point is Ian's comments on JBoss. Cheers -----Original Message----- From: Tim Fox To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10/26/01 5:29 AM Subject: Re: EJBHome and thread safety Another thought: >From the Javadoc: public interface EJBHome extends java.rmi.Remote So, EJBHome is an RMI object, and hence (according to your excerpt from the spec.) it should be thread-safe. (??) > -----Original Message----- > From: Fred Loney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 25 October 2001 21:18 > To: Tim Fox; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Re: EJBHome and thread safety > > > I'm curious where the potential for EjbHome resource contention lies. > AFAIK the stub is a stateless invoker that simply routes marshalled > objects. What is a scenario whereby two threads conflict over a stub? > > Regarding a spec reference, the RemoteStub is a RemoteObject and > according to the RMI spec Sec. 3.2: > > "A method dispatched by the RMI runtime to a remote object > implementation may or may not execute in a separate thread. The RMI > runtime makes no guarantees with respect to mapping remote object > invocations to threads. Since remote method invocation on the same > remote object may execute concurrently, a remote object implementation > needs to make sure its implementation is thread-safe." > > There are no EJB guarantees on the client stub and the above suggests > that in the absence of a guarantee otherwise it cannot be assumed > thread-safe. > > Fred Loney > Spirited Software, Inc. > www.spiritedsw.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tim Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 8:11 AM > Subject: Re: EJBHome and thread safety > > > > I'm not doubting you, but can you tell us how you came to the > conclusion > > that the EJBHome stub is not thread-safe? > > > > It's just that, if true, I have lots of code to rewrite (the > Home-cache > > pattern is very popular) :( > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: A mailing list for Enterprise JavaBeans development > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ian McCallion > > > Sent: 25 October 2001 15:11 > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: EJBHome and thread safety > > > > > > > > > > Laurel Neustadter wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Sanjeev: > > > > > > > > Isn't there a difference between a stub to the Home object > > > being thread-safe > > > > and the Home object itself being thread-safe? That is, the > > > latter doesn't > > > > imply the former. It seems the issue here is whether the stub > > > is thread-safe. > > > > > > You are correct. The actual EJBHome object on the server is not > > > important - > > > indeed, depending on the application server, there may be no > > > EJBHome class at > > > all. > > > > > > > > > ======================================== > > > Ian McCallion > > > Alexis Systems Limited > > > Romsey, UK > > > Tel: +44 1794 514883 > > > Fax: +44 1794 501692 > > > ======================================== > > > > > > ================================================================== > > > ========= > > > 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".
