|2. I thought marc had an idea of separating the container and interceptor |stack from the invoker, so many invokers could use the same |container/stack/ejb. I think this is a more promising way to go -- you can |say "all my ejbs should be invokable from JRMP and IIOP" or one or the |other individually. | |I may have missed something here, let me know.
It is not just an idea, this is implemented for the past 5 months or so, it is one of those new JBoss 3.0 powerful features that we need to clearly document. marcf | |david jencks | | |On 2002.03.20 10:08:48 -0500 Francisco Reverbel wrote: |> On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, Jason Dillon wrote: |> |> > Useful, yes... practical... probably not. With the current system |> > configuration this would be difficult to implement and still provide a |> > consistent view of the basic configuration attributes. |> |> I don't see this very clearly... Wouldn't be mostly a matter of setting |> up more than one MainDeployer, each seeing a different standardjboss.xml |> resource? |> |> > It seems like you want to provide an easy way to enable/disable jrmp & |> > iiop... it might be better to define some system properties to control |> > this. Perhaps then use a switchable interceptor to handle the |> > invocation layer? This way there is only one set of standard |> > configurations which are both rmi and iiop capable depending on the |> > value of some set of properties. |> |> Well, multiple server configurations are not strictly necessary. |> They could be convenient in some situations, just that. |> |> JBoss already provides ways to switch between JRMP & IIOP. Right now you |> can pick one of the following options: |> |> 1) change jboss.xml within your EJB jars, or |> |> 2) (if you do not want to change your EJB jars) |> use a separate JBoss server, whose configuration renders unnecessary |> any changes the jboss.xml files in your EJB jars. |> |> My suggestion aimed at avoiding both the need for changes in your EJB |> jars |> and the need for a separate JBoss server. You "switchable interceptor" |> hint |> sounds interesting, but where the "switch control" would be? If it would |> be |> in the jboss.xml files within your EJB jars, then it buys us nothing. |> |> > Or something... I don't know, but I would not like to see the system |> > augmented to support multipule configurations as you show in your |> example. |> |> I will not try to push my idea on you, as I really do not know how useful |> it |> would be in real scenarios. |> |> Best, |> |> Francisco |> |> |> |> |> |> _______________________________________________ |> Jboss-development mailing list |> [EMAIL PROTECTED] |> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development |> |> | |_______________________________________________ |Jboss-development mailing list |[EMAIL PROTECTED] |https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
