Thanks for the answer. So to summarize the scoping rules from CDI apply and the concurrency management from EJB apply when combining @Stateless and any of the @NormalScopes...
Regards Lars-Fredrik On 26 Aug 2014 16:50, "Romain Manni-Bucau" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi > > 2014-08-26 16:45 GMT+02:00 Lars-Fredrik Smedberg <[email protected]>: > > Hi > > > > I have a few questions on EJB, CDI and Concurrency when I read > > http://tomee.apache.org/examples-trunk/access-timeout/README.html, I > read > > > > - Concurrent access to a @Stateful bean is serialized by the container. > > > > I also understand that I can annotate the EJBs with any of the CDI-scopes > > (in my case I'm interested in @RequestScoped, @SessionScoped and > > @ApplicationScoped). > > > > Questions: > > > > 1. If I annotate the @Stateful bean with @RequestScoped I assume that I > get > > a separate bean instance for each call? Correct? > > yes > > > 2. If I annotate the @Stateful bean with @SessionScoped I assume that I > per > > sesion get a separate bean instance that allows concurrent calls withing > > that particular session without wait? Correct? > > you get one instance by session and calls are serialized if needed to > ensure thread safety > > > 3. If I annotate the @Stateful bean with @ApplicationScoped I assume > that I > > per application get one bean instance that allows concurrent calls > without > > wait? Correct? > > > > same as before, thread safety is ensured > > > The reason I ask is that as far as I understand CDI does not have any > > concurrency management but the EJB has. What will be the case when doing > as > > above? > > > > Please help me get some in-depth understanding on this. > > > > for @AppScoped => look @javax.ejb.Singleton and @Lock which is surely > better > > > Thanks > > Lars-Fredrik Smedberg > > > > > > > > -- > > Med vänlig hälsning / Best regards > > > > Lars-Fredrik Smedberg > > > > STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY: > > The information contained in this electronic message and any > > attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the > > address(es) and may contain confidential or privileged information. If > > you are not the intended recipient, please notify Lars-Fredrik Smedberg > > immediately at [email protected], and destroy all copies of this > > message and any attachments. >
