From user-return-14044-apmail-geronimo-user-archive=geronimo.apache.org@geronimo.apache.org Fri Oct 02 16:29:55 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 87358 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2009 16:29:55 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Oct 2009 16:29:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 32433 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2009 16:29:54 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-user-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 32400 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2009 16:29:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: user@geronimo.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list user@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 32391 invoked by uid 99); 2 Oct 2009 16:29:54 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 16:29:54 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of jaydmchugh@gmail.com designates 209.85.218.227 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.218.227] (HELO mail-bw0-f227.google.com) (209.85.218.227) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 16:29:43 +0000 Received: by bwz27 with SMTP id 27so1129264bwz.19 for ; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 09:29:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :x-enigmail-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=PbhJgL9JMor0dTZt5kShDy6edovR+8rhtFuTNQv2POI=; b=xr/il81NnkLXGFsErDpiR5PWjzz4YPSDPqzZtcpLMXQ4UhjTHHD9qFHBWqUY2Map+b GQfs2XRj6afxMlnnRxyMHQeYiCockvKH2h6+o3LqC0janTb7Z3YmU9TL12TCygpWjhlm umyTKMXdNWtaOOtB8LhXgKjj9Z9Q5ZNiZs5iI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=QFF/oSsK3yO5JMTQg9hQ0l5bIOBtRqVzRw7t3QLPLKHaMDwgVsJnjbwimhWeQsShJo WqhFAGwl0140Q52wyIXhC5ySLeMeEiaqxfzrY1aSwCrgLLeTWQB1nm0DT/c92XT5KQRk lOCkM8aELVW+IHiTGLP8UNOoOiM7UiUE6oC84= Received: by 10.204.5.207 with SMTP id 15mr1381780bkw.89.1254500963057; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 09:29:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?172.16.3.3? (198.pubint.com [66.84.139.198]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z10sm2572661fka.19.2009.10.02.09.29.20 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 02 Oct 2009 09:29:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4AC62A5B.5010909@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:29:15 -0500 From: "Jay D. McHugh" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: user@geronimo.apache.org Subject: Re: Persistence Issue on Timers - Geronimo 2.1.4 / EJB 3 References: <001d01ca433c$bc960ed0$35c22c70$@de> <7B69F03D-7056-4B25-AD31-060CB316BB36@yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <7B69F03D-7056-4B25-AD31-060CB316BB36@yahoo.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hey David and Norbert, I have been using timers in Geronimo for a while - but, I have not been using long running timers. Instead, I have been using them as a way to get processes to run in the background. So, I have not ever needed to shut down the server while there were active timers running. But, just for fun, I tried doing exactly that just now and it appears that Norbert is right - Shutting down Geronimo seems to destroy the timers. I am trying to double check that this is actually what is happening. If it is, then we need to get a JIRA filed for it. Jay David Jencks wrote: > > On Oct 2, 2009, at 1:45 AM, Norbert Rieger wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> we’re using Geronimo’s Timer Service with one of our SLSBs (using >> @Timeout annotation). >> >> As described in the specs the timers are persistent – or should be. >> >> But in our environment/application it seems that the timers are dropped if >> >> - the bean is redeployed >> - Geronimo is shutting down > > I'm not sure how the current timer persistence works but... I'd expect that > - redeploy would eliminate the timers from the original app and set up > new timers for the redeployed app. I don't see any other reasonable > behavior, since there's no reason to suppose the 2 versions of the app > have the same timers. > - shutting down geronimo would turn off the timers until either geronimo > or the app is restarted, at which time you'd start getting new timeouts. > > I'm not sure exactly what behavior you expect, could you explain in more > detail? > >> >> Are persistent timers the default behaviour within Geronimo, or must >> this be turned on (xml config e.g.) ? > there's no way to modify this by configuration. >> >> Is there a configuration file for timer‘s persistence configuration ? > > I don't think so, but I'm not certain of how they are persisted at the > moment. > > thanks > david jencks > >> >> Thanks a lot for your help. >> >> Many Greetings >> >> NR >