You can write JCA adapter and do (virtually) anything you want in it. It much easier 
than it sounds...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alex Sumner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 4:55 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [JBoss-user] Starting threads from session beans
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Wonder if it's permissible to enter a synchronized block? That would
> give me all I need, just add something to a list, then another thread
> (pre-existing) can pick it up and do something about it. 
> Otherwise it's
> MDBs and lots of messages, which is a big overhead for what I need.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Alex
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alastair
> Rodgers
> Sent: 28 March 2003 09:30
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [JBoss-user] Starting threads from session beans
> 
> 
> No, the EJB 2.0 Spec doesn't permit it. Section 24.1.2 (page 495)
> states: 
> 
> <quote>
> The enterprise bean must not attempt to manage threads. The enterprise
> bean must not attempt to start, stop, suspend, or resume a 
> thread; or to
> change a thread's priority or name. The enterprise bean must 
> not attempt
> to manage thread groups.
> 
> These functions are reserved for the EJB Container. Allowing the
> enterprise bean to manage threads would decrease the 
> Container's ability
> to properly manage the runtime environment. </quote>
> 
> 
> Regards, 
> Al.
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> > Alex Sumner
> > Sent: 27 March 2003 20:15
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: [JBoss-user] Starting threads from session beans
> > 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Briefly: is it permissible to start a new thread from a
> > thread running in a session bean? 
> > 
> > I've heard that it isn't allowed, but can't see this
> > explicitly prohibited in the J2EE specs. More importantly, 
> > what will the consequences be in JBoss? If the session bean 
> > thread is in a TX, would I be correct in assuming the new 
> > thread will not be associated with that TX?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Alex
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by:
> The Definitive IT and Networking Event. Be There!
> NetWorld+Interop Las Vegas 2003 -- Register today!
> http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?keyn0001en
> _______________________________________________
> JBoss-user mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by:
> The Definitive IT and Networking Event. Be There!
> NetWorld+Interop Las Vegas 2003 -- Register today!
> http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?keyn0001en
> _______________________________________________
> JBoss-user mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
> 


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
The Definitive IT and Networking Event. Be There!
NetWorld+Interop Las Vegas 2003 -- Register today!
http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?keyn0001en
_______________________________________________
JBoss-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user

Reply via email to