Hi Dain,
Thanks for the explanation. I think what you suggested is
the best bet i.e. better integration. I can try to test the AMQ
integration by writing some MDB iTests.
Thanks
Manu
On 12/14/06, Dain Sundstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Dec 13, 2006, at 5:01 AM, Manu George wrote:
> Hi,
> Are there plans to provide poolsize configuration for all types
> of containers. I am seeing support for stateless and stateful and for
> MDB container there is InstanceLimit which I assume is the same. Won't
> it be better to change this also to pool size for ease of
> configuration for users?
We can, but they aren't the same thing. In the MDB case we are
limiting the number of instances the resource adapter (ActiveMQ) is
allowed to acquire from the container. The actual pool size and
pooling configurations are completely controlled by the resource
adapter.
Then again, they setting should have the same effect as poolSize +
strict in the other containers.
What do you think we should do?
> Are there anything similar for CMP and BMP containers?
For cmp, pooling and caching is completely controlled by the JPA
implementation. I don't know about BMP.
One thing we should be able to do in the long run is provide stronger
integration with ActiveMQ and OpenJPA, where common settings like
PoolSize can be passed on into them, but to start with we need to get
our current ActiveMQ tested and the CMP container finished. Does
anyone want to try testing the ActiveMQ integration?
-dain
