geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Srinath Perera <hemap...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Why are gbeans not serialized but the gbean attributes are?
Date Thu, 26 May 2005 01:50:24 GMT
Thanks Aaron for the clarification ..I agree that magic attributes is
not *the* reason. But, if a GBean has a magic attribute and
serialized, it is not usable by just serializing
as the injection of the magic attributes again ect is needed. The
things may get bit complicated

I feel the GBean reconstruction from the disk, is a work to the
framework,  we can not just replace it with serialization. I prefer
the way it is there now.

But of course it is just my gut feeling :)
Thanks
Srinath

On 5/25/05, Aaron Mulder <ammulder@alumni.princeton.edu> wrote:
> Srinath,
>         There are several easy solutions to attributes you don't want to
> Serialize -- such as transient, read/writeObject, or Externalizable.  So I
> don't think the reason is simply that it would be hard to deal with the
> magic attributes.
> 
>         Of course, I'm not sure what advantage there would be to requiring
> that all GBeans be Serializable, either, since generally speaking they
> won't work if transferred somewhere over the network without speal
> reconstruction support on the other side...
> 
>         The more interesting question is Hiram's point on providing more
> advanced support for attribute contruction.  This seems to be one of the
> advantages Dain's Spring-based kernel provides.
> 
> Aaron
> 
> On Wed, 25 May 2005, Srinath Perera wrote:
> 
> > Hi Hiram;
> >
> > I will try to give a possible reason ..
> >
> > Not all the attributes in the GBeans are serializable, e.g.
> > ClassLoader, kernel attributes
> > in a GBean are not serializable, and have a special meaning in the
> > enviorment it runs.
> >
> > those so called magic attributes get the values from the enviorment ..
> > so serializing them do not make sense. I belive this is a reason
> > making attributes Serializable (only the persitant ones), but not the
> > GBeans,
> >
> > Thanks
> > Srinath
> >
> > On 5/21/05, Hiram Chirino <hiram@hiramchirino.com> wrote:
> > > I've been trying to analyze the reason why gbean attributes HAVE to be
> > > serializable.
> > >
> > > The facts are that:
> > >   1. A gbean itself does not need to be serializable.
> > >   2. Only the gbean attributes are serialized.
> > >   3. The de-serialized attributes are injected at runtime to construct
> > > the gbean.
> > >
> > > My question is why does a gbean get different treatment than attribute?
> > >   I've got a feeling it's this way because gbeans are complex objects
> > > while most gbean attributes are simple types.  But we are starting to
> > > see gbean objects that have complex attribute types.
> > >
> > > Why not also give gbean attributes the kind of runtime construction
> > > support that is given to gbeans?  If this was done, then you don't
> > > force complex attributes to implement the Serializable interfaces.
> > > This could go a long way in helping solve some of the serialization
> > > issues that are being discussed in other threads.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Hiram Chirino
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
View raw message