What if you don't have java on the client side? What if you're CORBA with
OTS? You're making it harder for Non-JBoss/Java clients to integrated with
us. I think this split should be undone.
BTW, why the split besides code readability? Is the DTM dependent on this
at all? Is the TM even
--- Bill Burke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What if you don't have java on the client side?
What if you're CORBA with
OTS? You're making it harder for Non-JBoss/Java
clients to integrated with
us. I think this split should be undone.
How des OTS work? The corba guys tackled the DTM
problem
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Hiram
Chirino
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; David Jencks
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] TxInterceptor split is bad
--- Bill Burke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What
Of Bill
Burke
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:36 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] TxInterceptor split is bad
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Hiram
Chirino
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:09 PM
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 1:31 PM
Subject: [JBoss-dev] TxInterceptor split is bad
What if you don't have java on the client side? What if you're CORBA with
OTS? You're making it harder for Non-JBoss/Java clients to integrated with
us. I think this split should
-
From: Bill Burke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:51 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] TxInterceptor split is bad
Another thing David,
I don't see you always stuffing the Transaction into the
invocation object. A few interceptors rely
Actually the code is much more readable. I guess my
only concern now is
non-java/jboss clients. And, do we care?
Non java code will have a seperate server-side invoker
and it should deal with the TX stuff as best it can.
In otherwords, do it the old way if it works better
for corba.
PROTECTED]
Cc: David Jencks
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] TxInterceptor split is bad AND broken?
Ok, I'm looking at the code further and I'm pretty confused on how a
Transaction get propagated across the wire now. Can you explain? I don't
see any code anywhere that is doing a tm.resume from
that is
past across the wire. Is this code broken?
Bill
-Original Message-
From: Bill Burke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:51 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] TxInterceptor split is
bad
Another thing David,
I don't see
it is hidden someplace.
Bill
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Hiram
Chirino
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 7:31 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: David Jencks
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] TxInterceptor split is bad AND broken
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 1:31 PM
Subject: [JBoss-dev] TxInterceptor split is bad
What if you don't have java on the client side? What if you're CORBA
with
OTS? You're making it harder for Non-JBoss/Java clients to integrated
with
us. I think this split
]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] TxInterceptor split is bad
In this case the client side method to tx support map uses MethodHash
values as keys since the Methods themselves are not serializable.
Seems to
me that we should put the MethodHash values in the invocation to start
with.
david
, 2003 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] TxInterceptor split is bad
In this case the client side method to tx support map uses MethodHash
values as keys since the Methods themselves are not serializable. Seems to
me that we should put the MethodHash values in the invocation to start
13 matches
Mail list logo
