activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Hiram Chirino" <hi...@hiramchirino.com>
Subject Re: connections or sessions
Date Wed, 02 Aug 2006 15:33:18 GMT
The Session Pools they refer to were an optional part of the 1.0.2 JMS
spec that allowed applications servers to pool jms sessions.  Why?
because each JMS session typically requires a dedicated dispatch
thread (to deliver to MDBs) associated with it and most app servers
want to be in control of thread creation.  With the advent of JCA 1.5,
the inbound contracts provide a much better way to interface JMS
provides and MDBs so the  Session Pool stuff has fallen out of favor.
But in short, the connection/session pooling that we were talking
about and the Session Pool stuff that document talks about are not the
same stuff.

On 8/2/06, Paul French <paul.french@frenchiesystems.com> wrote:
>
> So why does Jencks for example create a pool of connections ? I know it pools
> sessions producers/consumers as well but in general if I use Jencks I will
> have many connections. There must be a reason? I've googled all over the
> place and I did see a quote on a web logic site which made no sense to me
> but it might to you
>
> http://edocs.bea.com/wls/docs81/jms/implement.html#1298531
>
>
>
> > Note: Session pools are now used rarely, as they are not a required part
> > of the J2EE specification, do not support JTA user transactions, and are
> > largely superseded by message-driven beans (MDBs), which are simpler,
> > easier to manage, and more capable. For more information on designing
> > MDBs, see "Designing and Developing Message-Driven Beans" in Programming
> > WebLogic Enterprise JavaBeans
> >
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/connections-or-sessions-tf2039029.html#a5614990
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User forum at Nabble.com.
>
>


-- 
Regards,
Hiram

Blog: http://hiramchirino.com

Mime
View raw message