Update: I have successfully run Romain's code and it performs as advertised.
However, when I deploy Romain's bean to the Tomee server, the pool has the
same problems as before: only one bean is provided to the client by the
container.
As in the output looks like:
>>> 35
>>> 35
>>> 35
.. and so on.
Log output in the constructor indicates 100 beans are instantiated. The
tomee log output says:
INFO: Created Ejb(deployment-id=foo, ejb-name=TestBean, container=foo)
and
INFO: Started Ejb(deployment-id=foo, ejb-name=TestBean, container=foo)
My deployment info is as follows:
In tomee.xml I have only:
<Container id="foo" type="STATELESS">
minSize = 100
maxSize = 100
</Container>
In ejb-jar.xml:
<session>
<ejb-name>TestBean</ejb-name>
<ejb-class>org.TestBean</ejb-class>
<session-type>Stateless</session-type>
<transaction-type>Container</transaction-type>
</session>
Best,
Stuart
On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Stuart Easterling <
[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Howard, thanks for your reply. To clarify, the singleton bean is not
> the issue: that is working fine, and as expected there is only one bean
> instantiated. I only mentioned this to clarify that I do have a workaround
> for now. : )
>
> The problem I am having is with the stateless session bean pool. For a
> pool of 100 instances, the container is only making the last 3 instantiated
> beans available to me (for details see my previous post).
>
> In addition, the differences between the behavior of my test
> implementation and Romain's is odd: it seems the two containers are
> behaving quite differently as far as bean pooling, and I am wondering if
> this might help explain the problem with my container/pool.
>
> Best,
> Stuart
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Howard W. Smith, Jr. <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Stuart,
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Stuart Easterling <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Romain, I think I may need to do that (my current workaround is to
>> use a
>> > singleton bean and many threads, but I'd like to get my pool working
>> too :
>> > ).
>> >
>>
>> you seem to want to know the difference between the behavior/execution of
>> your code and Romain's code. you mentioned 'singleton bean and many
>> threads', above. did you share your singleton bean code already in this
>> thread? sorry if i missed that.
>>
>> i'm asking/responding, as you asked if anyone seen this behavior before
>> (in
>> their app). the only time, I've seen similar behavior is with my singleton
>> beans... the latest (or only) instantiated singleton bean...is
>> used/referenced.
>>
>
>
