no only for scoped stateful. for singleton/stateless you get the ejb proxy directly
Romain Manni-Bucau Twitter: @rmannibucau Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau 2014-08-26 21:10 GMT+02:00 Lars-Fredrik Smedberg <[email protected]>: > Sorry for that, ofcourse I meant @Stateful, that was what we discussed in > the previous posts :) > > Thinking of the CDI proxy in front of the EJB proxy makes it easier to > understand what is going on under the hood. > > A follow up question: > > - Will a CDI proxy always be created in front of the EJB proxy if the EJB > is injected using @Inject? Or is that also the case when using @EJB? I > guess even for dependent scoped CDI beans a proxy is used to be able to > trigger interceptors etc. > > > Regards > LF > > > On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> replace @Stateless by @Stateful and it is that >> >> cdi scope is just a proxy in front of ejb proxy >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> Twitter: @rmannibucau >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau >> >> >> 2014-08-26 17:54 GMT+02:00 Lars-Fredrik Smedberg <[email protected]>: >> > 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. >> >> >> > > > > -- > 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.
