User development,

A new message was posted in the thread "Undemanding Dependencies":

http://community.jboss.org/message/521552#521552

Author  : David Lloyd
Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/[email protected]

Message:
--------------------------------------------------------------
> mailto:[email protected] wrote:
>  
> > mailto:[email protected] wrote:
> >  
> > > mailto:[email protected] wrote:
> > >  
> > > Editor, ate my post again. ;-)
> > >  
> > > Following the last comment, I'm not sure you wouldn't want more fine 
> > > grained control on
> > > which dependencies start your bean?
> > >  
> > > <bean name="A" mode="On Demand">
> > >    <property name="b"><inject bean="B" 
> > > transitive-start="true"/></property>
> > > <bean>
> > >  
> > > <bean name="B" mode="On Demand"/>
> > Ah, that would be neat.  Let me see if I can wrap my brain around that...
> >  
> > So in this example, transitive-start would really mean that the targeted 
> > bean would control when this bean starts.  So the question is, if you had 
> > two such injected bean properties, when would A start?  When either 
> > injection is started, or only when both are?
> You could make a configuration option, e.g. something like
>  
> Require both dependencies to start:
>  
> <bean name="A" mode="On Demand">
>    <property name="b"><inject bean="B" 
> transitive-start="required"/></property>
>    <property name="c"><inject bean="C" 
> transitive-start="required"/></property>
> <bean>
>  
> Any one
>  
> <bean name="A" mode="On Demand">
>    <property name="b"><inject bean="B" 
> transitive-start="optional"/></property>
>    <property name="c"><inject bean="C" 
> transitive-start="optional"/></property>
> <bean>
>  
> 
> But unless starting A triggers some other knock-on effects, the second 
> example is likely to stall with a missing dependency anyway. ;-)
> So I think you'd probably want all the dependencies marked transitive-start 
> anyway?
 
The effect I'm envisioning for the latter case would run like this:
1. Something ("D") depending on C is started
2. This causes A to want to be demanded

3. A then demands that B start, since A has been demanded

4. A, B, and C are all started because D depended on C
 
Not sure if that really makes sense in terms of use case though.  Also 
(disclaimer!) I'm not sure that I'm using the term "demand" correctly in this 
context.

--------------------------------------------------------------

To reply to this message visit the message page: 
http://community.jboss.org/message/521552#521552


_______________________________________________
jboss-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user

Reply via email to