imagine
> that most vendors will steer clear of this approach in so far as they can,
> so its utility as a learning tool is certainly diminished.
>
> Greg
>
> -Original Message-
> From: cyrus brocha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 8:3
cyrus brocha wrote:
>
> Hey ! Greg,
>yes ! you are correct that there is nothing
> that prevents from doint that..
>is anybody aware of any such implementations ?
> may be for handling MDB stuff of EJB2.0..
>is this the approach generally ppl take to
> implement MDB ??
The
dors will steer clear of this approach in so far as they can,
so its utility as a learning tool is certainly diminished.
Greg
-Original Message-
From: cyrus brocha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 8:34 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: jms application server interfac
Hey ! Greg,
yes ! you are correct that there is nothing
that prevents from doint that..
is anybody aware of any such implementations ?
may be for handling MDB stuff of EJB2.0..
is this the approach generally ppl take to
implement MDB ??
and for that the CONTAINER should
This can be supported for Topics or Queues.
Greg
-Original Message-
From: cyrus brocha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 1:44 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: jms application server interfaces
Hello people,
I would be glad if anybody can clarify my
doubt
Hello people,
I would be glad if anybody can clarify my
doubt..
Q : In the JMS Spec, the 8th chapter talks about the
Interfaces for the App Server to implement. Now my
doubt is if those interfaces like ConnectionConsumer,
ServerSession etc. All these are used to handle
concurrent processin
