geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: RTC PLEASE COMMENT Priority order for starting gbeans.
Date Mon, 06 Nov 2006 01:17:09 GMT
Since Gianny fixed the reason I thought there might be a question  
about this code I intend to commit it (including gianny's backward- 
compatibility fix) shortly.

Many thanks Gianny!

david jencks

On Nov 5, 2006, at 5:38 AM, Gianny Damour wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I reviewed the proposed patch and it is ok. Also , I have submitted  
> a geronimo-kernel only patch to maintain compatibility with  
> previous releases.
>
> Thanks,
> Gianny
>
>
> On 05/11/2006, at 7:54 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>
>> See GERONIMO-2541
>>
>> In order for runtime class enhancement for jpa to have any chance  
>> of working, the persistence provider has to get started before  
>> much of anything else happens so it can install the bytecode  
>> transformer before any classes that need enhancement get loaded.
>>
>> To support this I wrote a priority order loading feature for  
>> gbeans, see GERONIMO-2541.  This is pretty simple and appears to  
>> work fine except it will prevent any pre-1.2 configurations from  
>> running on 1.2 servers:  I have to write the priority for each  
>> gbeandata in the serialized gbeanstate.  I don't know how to fix  
>> this: if anyone else does please speak up.
>>
>> Runtime enhancement seems to work ok with this feature for simple  
>> apps that use ejbs and web apps but there are some situations in  
>> which I cannot get runtime enhancement to work because the classes  
>> are loaded when some gbeans are loaded before any gbeans are  
>> started.  So far this has occurred with web services that use an  
>> enhanced class as a paramenter: I think that the axis 1 mapping  
>> info includes seriailzed class instances rather than the names of  
>> the classes involved.
>>
>> So, is runtime enhancement for some jpa apps worth breaking  
>> backwards compatibility for configs?  Can we do something to  
>> recognize both old and new config formats?  If I don't hear  
>> anything against this in a few days (about 3) I'm going to go  
>> ahead and break backwards compatibility and commit this patch.....  
>> you are warned.
>>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>


Mime
View raw message