User: cgjung
Date: 01/06/26 23:51:42
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/deployment/scope
J2eeGlobalScopeDeployer.java
Log:
redundant (and since lately broken) import removed.
Revision ChangesPath
1.10 +0 -1
jboss/src/main/org/jboss/deploymen
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
>Von: marc fleury [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Gesendet: Dienstag, 26. Juni 2001 17:50
>An: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Betreff: RE: [JBoss-dev] micro-kernel design
>could be please send a description I will try to tackle it soon
@see thread "CVS update: J2eeGlobalScopeD
gt;Simone Bordet
|| +* @author Bill Burke
|| +* @author mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]";>Marc Fleury
|| +*
|| +*
|| +* Revisions:
|| +*
|| +* 20010626 marc fleury: Cache should be working with the
||MethodInvocation
|| +*
|| +* @version $Revision: 1.12 $
|| +*/
||
a public constructor that takes a single argument of type
| +* AbstractInstanceCache.class or a subclass
| +*
| +*
| +*
| +* @author mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]";>Simone Bordet
| +* @author Bill Burke
| +* @author mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]";>Marc Fleury
| +*
| +*
| +* Revisions
* @author mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]";>Marc Fleury
+*
+*
+* Revisions:
+*
+* 20010626 marc fleury: Cache should be working with the MethodInvocation
+*
+* @version $Revision: 1.12 $
+*/
public abstract class AbstractInstanceCache
- implements InstanceCache,
we are discussing exactly the opposite, I am deeply convinced that this
belongs in jaws
marcf
|-Original Message-
|From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 11:56 PM
|To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Subject: [JBoss-dev] CVS up
|I think you missed one of the old messages (way to many today).
|
|It appears that if you changes the transaction isolation in the middle of a
|transaction the driver can perform an implicit commit (YUCK).
|
|So, I don't think we can trust drivers to allows us to change the level on
|the fly.
we
User: dsundstrom
Date: 01/06/26 20:55:36
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/ejb/plugins/jaws/jdbc JDBCCommand.java
Log:
Removed configurable transaction isolation code. Will be implemented in
JBossPool.
Revision ChangesPath
1.37 +2 -8 jboss/src/main/org/jboss/ejb/p
User: dsundstrom
Date: 01/06/26 20:55:36
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/ejb/plugins/jaws/metadata
JawsApplicationMetaData.java
Log:
Removed configurable transaction isolation code. Will be implemented in
JBossPool.
Revision ChangesPath
1.8 +
User: dsundstrom
Date: 01/06/26 20:55:36
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/ejb/plugins/cmp/jdbc
JDBCStoreManager.java
Log:
Removed configurable transaction isolation code. Will be implemented in
JBossPool.
Revision ChangesPath
1.3 +2 -11
j
User: dsundstrom
Date: 01/06/26 20:55:36
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/ejb/plugins/cmp/jdbc/metadata
JDBCApplicationMetaData.java
Log:
Removed configurable transaction isolation code. Will be implemented in
JBossPool.
Revision ChangesPath
1.4
I think you missed one of the old messages (way to many today).
It appears that if you changes the transaction isolation in the middle of a
transaction the driver can perform an implicit commit (YUCK).
So, I don't think we can trust drivers to allows us to change the level on
the fly.
-dain
---
Talking about pools, While looking at the ASF stuff, it looks like every
depolyed MDB gets it's own Thread Pool.. I have a feeling that this is NOT
how it's soposed to be.
Regards,
Hiram
>From: "marc fleury" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject:
|> Sure, it would be useful to be able to specify different levels per
|> bean, but given the apparent constraints that the databases are putting
|> us under, implementing it against the database isn't feasable.
|>
|
|Just use a freakin' different connection pool for different beans and there
|is
|2 entity beans. 2 connection pools(but same database), each connection pool
|is configured to use a certain JDBC isolation level. Entity 1 is attach to
|pool 1, Entity 2 is attached to pool 2.
yuck...
I still don't have a clear answer to
what we do = (does a jdbc connection support setting iso
>From: "Scott M Stark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Two issues with MDB/ASF
>Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 13:49:10 -0700
>
>These are gone. See the last reply to Hiram's cleanup work.
>All that remains is a trivial leak of ASF Thr
User: chirino
Date: 01/06/26 20:08:21
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/util Info.java
Log:
I fixed the leaky ThreadGroup problem with the ASF and
improved the output the listThreadDump function in the Info MBean
Revision ChangesPath
1.9 +13 -3 jboss/src/main/org/
User: chirino
Date: 01/06/26 20:08:21
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/jms/asf StdServerSessionPool.java
Log:
I fixed the leaky ThreadGroup problem with the ASF and
improved the output the listThreadDump function in the Info MBean
Revision ChangesPath
1.7 +1 -3
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS=
=
___
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS=
=
Buildfile: build.xml
init:
[echo] build.compiler = ${build.compiler}
[echo]
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS=
=
Buildfile: build.xml
init:
error:
[echo] jboss.home = ../jboss/dist is not a va
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS=
=
Buildfile: build.xml
init:
error:
[echo] jboss.home = ../jboss/dist is not a va
=
==THIS IS AN AUTOMATED EMAIL - SEE http://www.lubega.com FOR DETAILS=
=
Buildfile: build.xml
init:
[echo] build.compiler = classic
[echo] java.home
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 18:27:19
Modified:.cvs.jsp
Log:
Add contrib/tomcat and contrib/jetty to the list of cvs modules to
identify them explictly
Revision ChangesPath
1.4 +67 -65newsite/cvs.jsp
Index: cvs.jsp
Yes, see http://www.jboss.org/cvs.jsp
> Thank you for fixing that so quickly :) I am assuming that was the source
> of my NullPointerException. I could fix these things myself, then submit a
> diff to ya'll... are there any instructions on getting the cvs version
> to build? i.e. what each direct
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 18:21:39
Modified:src/lib Tag: Branch_2_4 tomcat-service.jar
Log:
Include NPE fix from tomcat/contrib
Revision ChangesPath
No revision
No revision
1.9.6.3 +52 -57jboss/src/lib/tomcat
On Tue, 26 Jun 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> User: starksm
> Date: 01/06/26 18:05:59
>
> Modified:tomcat/src/main/org/jboss/tomcat/security Tag: Branch_2_4
> JBossSecurityMgrRealm.java
> Log:
> The password String may be null so validate before invoking
>
Change Notes item #436590, was opened at 2001-06-26 18:17
You can respond by visiting:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=381174&aid=436590&group_id=22866
Category: None
Group: v2.4
Status: Open
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Scott M Stark (starksm)
Assigned to: Scott M Stark (starksm)
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 18:13:53
Modified:tomcat/src/main/org/jboss/tomcat/security
JBossSecurityMgrRealm.java
Log:
Handle null passwords correctly
Revision ChangesPath
1.5 +5 -2
contrib/tomcat/src/main/org/jboss/tomcat/security/
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 18:05:59
Modified:tomcat/src/main/org/jboss/tomcat/security Tag: Branch_2_4
JBossSecurityMgrRealm.java
Log:
The password String may be null so validate before invoking
toCharArray()
Revision ChangesPath
No
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Georg
> Rehfeld
> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 8:17 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] High load...
>
>
> Hi
>
> who ever it was, said:
> > > I'm thinking of the isolation level as
Ok, I'll take a look at the ASF thread group problem tonight.
The jbossmq stuff in the jboss module are:
src/lib/jbossmq.jar
src/lib/gnu-regexp-1.0.8.jar
src/lib/oswego-concurrent.jar
src/lib/log4j.jar
src/client/jbossmq-client.jar
src/client/gnu-regexp-1.0.8.jar
src/client/oswego-concurrent.jar
Hi
who ever it was, said:
> > I'm thinking of the isolation level as an immutable part of the
> > transaction - partly because this is how the databases implement it (at
> > least as far as JDBC goes).
> >
> > Sure, it would be useful to be able to specify different levels per
> > bean, but given
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 17:23:13
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/metadata Tag: Branch_2_4
EnvEntryMetaData.java
Log:
Trim env type string to avoid ClassNotFound errors
Revision ChangesPath
No revision
No
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 17:22:47
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/ejb Tag: Branch_2_4 ContainerFactory.java
Log:
Fix test of the container-interceptor transaction attribute against
the default value of Both
Revision ChangesPath
No revision
No
Change Notes item #436564, was opened at 2001-06-26 17:19
You can respond by visiting:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=381174&aid=436564&group_id=22866
Category: None
Group: v2.4
Status: Open
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Scott M Stark (starksm)
Assigned to: Scott M Stark (starksm)
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 17:04:12
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/metadata EnvEntryMetaData.java
Log:
Trim space around env-entry-type to avoid ClassNotFound exceptions that
are hard to understand
Revision ChangesPath
1.4 +3 -1 jboss/src/main/org/jboss/meta
Hi
Marc Fleury wrote:
> precisely, I already fought with Vinay the "many instances
> speedup fallacy"
>
> it's a lie...
>
> if you don't break the pessimistic locking at the db then it is
> useless.
so this puts more stress on me to implement it, as it is usefull
already with multiple server in
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David
> Jencks
> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 6:57 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] High load...
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Ok, I was thinking of within one db. I'm working on a logical
> inc
Hi,
Ok, I was thinking of within one db. I'm working on a logical
inconsistency example if you change isolation within one db, but I don't
have it yet. I agree, if you have a loosely coupled distributed
transaction, even on one resource manager, the different branches can have
different isolati
Bugs item #436550, was opened at 2001-06-26 15:51
You can respond by visiting:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=376685&aid=436550&group_id=22866
Category: JBossServer
Group: v2.2 (stable)
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Sebastien Sahuc (ssahuc)
Assigned to
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of danch
> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 6:31 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] High load...
>
>
> marc fleury wrote:
>
> > |But if they're in the same transaction, they must use the s
Hi,
David Jencks wrote:
> Yes, I was trying to point out that interbase/firebird has been
> doing this successfully for 15 years, we can have our container
> do it too, here's an algorithm
you left out the most interesting: the algorithm! Please forward!
> Someone mentioned that there "might"
marc fleury wrote:
> |But if they're in the same transaction, they must use the same isolation
> |level - per our discussion on the database doing an implicite commit
> |when you try to change levels. I don't think it makes logical sense to
> |talk about having two different transaction isolation
Hi,
Bill Burke:
> Why can't a transaction manage different resources and each of those
> resources use a different transaction-isolation level? What's wrong with
> that?
There is nothing wrong with the idea IMHO.
As I told earlier, some DB's (Informix) actually can do such
isolation level swit
Bill Burke wrote:
> Why can't a transaction manage different resources and each of those
> resources use a different transaction-isolation level? What's wrong with
> that?
If different resources == different DB connections, i suppose it could.
Maybe. But I keep thinking of the isolation level
User: vharcq
Date: 01/06/26 15:23:15
Modified:src/examples/build build.xml
Log:
As Scott mention, no need to pass parameters, it's magic
Revision ChangesPath
1.9 +6 -28 manual/src/examples/build/build.xml
Index: build.xml
==
I'm going to see the movie AI. This will give you guys a couple of hours to
discuss this. If you still want me to remove the transaction isolation
code, I'll do it arround 10 p.m. centeral time.
-dain
___
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTEC
|Why can't a transaction manage different resources and each of those
|resources use a different transaction-isolation level? What's wrong with
|that?
imho nothing
marcf
___
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.n
sorry
I didn't see it before, thanks for pinging me privately, no thanks for the html
:(
The
test does cover what you talk about: a remove that is working in parallel with a
passivation.
What I
would really want to do is trigger passivation (in the job thread not C) and
timeouts. Fra
Why can't a transaction manage different resources and each of those
resources use a different transaction-isolation level? What's wrong with
that?
Bill
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David
> Jencks
> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001
Hi,
David Jencks:
> I don't think I understand what you are suggesting. However...
Just as a reminder, my suggestions for mimicked optimistic
locking was:
generate SQL for update/delete with a where clause not only
using the primary key fields, but also the old values of changed
fields / all f
Hi Geeks
Today Sun announced that they added new stuff to the
JMX-RI like remote access to MBeanServers but they
they only released the binary code.
Do we stay with what we have right now or do we want
to move on an replace the actual JBoss RMI-Connector
with the classes from the JMX-RI ?
When
Posted to jmx-forum by Christophe today...
On 2001.06.26 13:51 Christophe Ebro wrote:
Hello
I am proud to announce that Sun has decided to provide in the packages of
the JMX 1.0 RI some new contribs.
These extensions are:
Remoting
- RemoteMBeanServer class
allows on the client side to create
Hi,
since you can't change the transaction isolation after you start the
transaction, the isolation is determined by the outermost isolation
specifier.
david jencks
On 2001.06.26 16:47:16 -0400 danch (Dan Christopherson) wrote:
> David Jencks wrote:
> Read on - the problem with this occured to
Hi Jim
This will be delivered by JBoss's JSR-77 implementation and
we only need to visualize them.
Mad Andy
> -Original Message-
> From: Jim Archer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 12:43 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] JBoss Management GUI
|But if they're in the same transaction, they must use the same isolation
|level - per our discussion on the database doing an implicite commit
|when you try to change levels. I don't think it makes logical sense to
|talk about having two different transaction isolation levels in the same
|transac
Hi,
On 2001.06.26 16:45:46 -0400 marc fleury wrote:
> |I don't think I understand what you are suggesting. However...
> |
> |Are you familiar with the lock-free versioning/ optimistic locking
> scheme
> |used in interbase/firebird?
> |
> |transactions are numbered sequentially when they are start
But if they're in the same transaction, they must use the same isolation
level - per our discussion on the database doing an implicite commit
when you try to change levels. I don't think it makes logical sense to
talk about having two different transaction isolation levels in the same
transact
i just want to say that the passivating caches from Simone are actually
pretty *amazing*, really solid and well thought out...
what was fucked up was the locking mechanisms around it but the part he was
supposed to do, the passivation, is really solid so kudos to you simone.
In fact I will try t
On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Scott M Stark wrote:
> These are gone. See the last reply to Hiram's cleanup work.
> All that remains is a trivial leak of ASF ThreadGroup objects.
Ok, thats nice. Will you look into it, or should I do it (I have to warn
you tough, my windows of oportunities to work are seve
|I disagreewell, at least for our app, we have transactions where some
|entities really need to be serialized and other entities within the
|transaction are just fine with read_committed.
we will need to express this in code, but there are really 2 levels of
synchronization that need to happe
I disagreewell, at least for our app, we have transactions where some
entities really need to be serialized and other entities within the
transaction are just fine with read_committed.
Bill
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David
> > > > |Please correct me if I'm wrong(I seem to be wrong about 50% of the
> > > > |time :-),
> > > > |but, I really don't think you should expose transaction-isolation
> > levels
> > > > |within CMP or in the definition of entities. This really belongs
in
> > the
> > > > |creation of the connec
On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 04:21:12PM -0400, Bill Burke wrote:
>
>
> > > Any way, I think I should roll back my change. If you agree
> > marc, just say
> > > so and it is done.
> > >
> > > I don't know any thing about Minerva, so if you want that
> > changed, someone
> > > else would be better suit
JMX is one example. I don't need any classes other than JXM and the
classes returned by the JMX invocation on the MBeanServer.
- Original Message -
From: "David Jencks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 10:12 AM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] micro-kernel
Hey guys, you are too fast ...
... or no, I'm too slow, that's it :-), while writing my last message
Hey guys, you are too fast ...
... or no, I'm too slow, that is :-), while writing my last
message, you almost completely discussed the topic, someone
already implemented part of it and I can't
David Jencks wrote:
Read on - the problem with this occured to a few of us already. Although
none of us mentioned putting it in the container-transaction - that's
interesting. But what if a method at iso 'read-uncommitted' calls a
method in an iso 'serializable' transaction?
thanks,
danch
> H
These are gone. See the last reply to Hiram's cleanup work.
All that remains is a trivial leak of ASF ThreadGroup objects.
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Antman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "JBoss Dev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 1:13 PM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Two i
|I don't think I understand what you are suggesting. However...
|
|Are you familiar with the lock-free versioning/ optimistic locking scheme
|used in interbase/firebird?
|
|transactions are numbered sequentially when they are started.
|
|Each record (version) includes the transaction id of the la
Hi,
Forgive me if I am talking nonsense, but doesn't it only make sense to have
transaction isolation per transaction I very much doubt you will find
a db that can support several transaction isolation levels within one
transaction. I can't quite figure out what it would mean, either. So I
Hi,
What is a typeless invocation layer and how does it work? (reference would
be fine)
I ran into this problem in several places working on my rule engine
prototype. I think Dr. Jung's solution would solve all the problems I had,
which were not just between mbeans and ejbs, but also between a r
Hi,
On 2001.06.26 11:24:43 -0400 Georg Rehfeld wrote:
> But maybe Bill is right, OL could be used with commit option A
> and single bean instances too? I'm not really sure ... no I
> don't think so, because then every TX is working on state
> possibly modified by another TX and, even worse, with
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dain
> Sundstrom
> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 3:56 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Fw: [JBoss-dev] Shouldn't expose transaction-isolation within
> CMP
>
>
> Sorry, didn't get to to line right
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>>I think I understand now. Here is some text I found the J2EE tutorial:
>>
>>
>>You cannot modify the isolation level of a entity beans with
>>container-managed persistence. These beans use the default isolation level
>>of the DBMS, which is usually READ_COMMI
> >>>I don't know if you wanted with user configurable, but for now it will
> >>>
> > allow
> >
> >>>you to play with different levels. I can make it static later.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>static?
> >>
> >>
> > fixed
> >
>
> Like at compile time, literally 'static' in the java sense static?
> Please
All of this is covered in detail in section 17.3.2 of the EJB 2.0 spec. I
think everyone should take a secound and read it (it is only three
paragraphs).
-dain
- Original Message -
From: "Bill Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 2:52 PM
Subjec
Hi Bill,
> Sorry Georg, I don't what planet I was on when I made the "option A with
> optimistic locking" comment.
Oh, might be, you had multiple instances with commit option A in
mind? Marc assumed that and seems to be about implementing that.
I have to rethink that scenario before commenting
On Sun, 24 Jun 2001, Hiram Chirino wrote:
>
> Don't worry, I have the angle covered. I adjusted JMSProviderLoader so that
> you can configure where in JNDI to get it's connetion factories from. So
> now you configure the MBean with something like:
>
>name=":service=JMSProviderLoader,nam
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of marc
> fleury
> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 3:05 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Shouldn't expose transaction-isolation within
> CMP
>
>
> |Please correc
Sorry, didn't get to to line right on this message, and it only went to
marc... read below...
-dain
- Original Message -
From: "Dain Sundstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "marc fleury" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 2:24 PM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Shouldn't expose transac
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>>>I don't know if you wanted with user configurable, but for now it will
>>>
> allow
>
>>>you to play with different levels. I can make it static later.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>static?
>>
>>
> fixed
>
Like at compile time, literally 'static' in the java sense static?
Please god,
Hi Erin...
Whats your overall goal? Is it to produce a tool to monitor jBoss as it
runs, or to produce a tool to package apps?
If the former, I would love a tool that can present cache, memory and
thread use stats in real time. Info about the number of hits and such (for
jBoss bundled with a
marc fleury wrote:
> |Please correct me if I'm wrong(I seem to be wrong about 50% of the
> |time :-),
> |but, I really don't think you should expose transaction-isolation levels
> |within CMP or in the definition of entities. This really belongs in the
> |creation of the connection pool. CMP ca
Bill Burke wrote:
>
>
> Isolation levels and locking are really orthonogal, aren't they?
The isolation level is really a hint to the DB as to how you want to lock.
>
>
>>|All in all, I think JBOSS should delegate synching and locking to the DB
>>
>>sure but my point is that can be a cache
> >
> > I don't know if you wanted with user configurable, but for now it will
allow
> > you to play with different levels. I can make it static later.
> >
>
>
> static?
>
fixed
___
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourcef
|Please correct me if I'm wrong(I seem to be wrong about 50% of the
|time :-),
|but, I really don't think you should expose transaction-isolation levels
|within CMP or in the definition of entities. This really belongs in the
|creation of the connection pool. CMP cannot really guarantee that a
|
User: schaefera
Date: 01/06/26 12:00:26
Modified:src/main/org/jboss/deployment/scope
J2eeGlobalScopeDeployer.java
Log:
Fixed what I screwed up and brought version 1.7 back in (Sorry).
Revision ChangesPath
1.9 +497 -0
jboss/src/main/org/j
|Isolation levels and locking are really orthonogal, aren't they?
not entirely for example if we decide to NOT lock at the cache level
something that the new cache design will allow then you need to make sure
that isolation levels are such that you don't corrupt your db.
yes the code that lo
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dain
> Sundstrom
> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 2:20 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] High load...
>
>
> > we would have to implement the transaction isolation levels correctly in
Dain,
I really don't think this will work. Please see my previous email.
Bill
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 2:32 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [JBoss-dev] CVS update:
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of marc
> fleury
> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 1:28 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] High load...
>
>
> |Sorry Georg, I don't what planet I was on when I made the "option A with
>
> |I added transaction isolation to the new cmp plugin. You can set it by
> |adding the element after the datasource element.
> |Valid levels are:
> |transaction-none
> |transaction-read-committed
> |transaction-read-uncommitted
> |transaction-repeatable-read
> |transaction-s
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>
> I don't know if you wanted with user configurable, but for now it will allow
> you to play with different levels. I can make it static later.
>
static?
___
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 11:28:34
Added: src/main/org/jboss/test/perf/ejb ProbeBean.java
Log:
Add simple method invocation timing tests
Revision ChangesPath
1.1 jbosstest/src/main/org/jboss/test/perf/ejb/ProbeBean.java
Index: ProbeBean.java
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 11:23:30
Modified:src/build/subprojects build-perf.xml
Log:
Add a simple call invocation timing testcase
Revision ChangesPath
1.2 +32 -27jbosstest/src/build/subprojects/build-perf.xml
Index: build-perf.xml
==
To finally bring the JBoss GUI flying let's start
a project for that ;-)
My idea of the JBoss GUI would be a dynamic, expandable
and version aware GUI helping an administrator, deployer
and Developer dealing with JBoss.
The basic requirements for the GUI would be:
- Able to add and remove GUI co
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 11:24:10
Modified:src/resources/perf/META-INF ejb-jar.xml
Log:
Add Probe and ProbeCMT bean definitions
Revision ChangesPath
1.2 +45 -28jbosstest/src/resources/perf/META-INF/ejb-jar.xml
Index: ejb-jar.xml
Done.. It is now in both JAWS and JBossCMP.
-dain
- Original Message -
From: "Dain Sundstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] High load...
> > we would have to implement the transaction isolation levels correctly
User: starksm
Date: 01/06/26 11:28:35
Added: src/main/org/jboss/test/perf/test TestProbe.java
Log:
Add simple method invocation timing tests
Revision ChangesPath
1.1 jbosstest/src/main/org/jboss/test/perf/test/TestProbe.java
Index: TestProbe.java
1 - 100 of 140 matches
Mail list logo
