openwebbeans-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Lars-Fredrik Smedberg <itsme...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Questions on sevice implementation bean and handler life cycle
Date Fri, 15 Aug 2014 16:59:07 GMT
Thanks Joseph, will take a look at the link.

Also JSR109 also states that a JAX WS WebService can be either a Java
class, a stateless EJB or a singleton EJB (I missed that before when
looking) so please ignore the questions asked about a statefull JAX-WS
WebService I asked before today :)

Regards
Lars-Fredrik


On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 5:19 PM, Joseph Bergmark <bergmark@gmail.com> wrote:

> Unfortunately I can only provide some educated guesses.  I would guess
> that there would be different pooling mechanisms used for EJB vs. non-EJB
> web services, as I would guess that the EJB based ones would be handled by
> the EJB container's pooling mechanism.
>
> For question about configuring JAX-WS and the EJB container in WebSphere I
> would suggest asking on the wasdev forums.  That said a quick search lead
> me to:
>
> http://www-01.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/api/content/SSEQTP_8.5.5/com.ibm.websphere.base.iseries.doc/ae/rejb_ecnt.html#rejbecnt__rejb_ecnt1
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Lars-Fredrik Smedberg <
> itsmeden@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Joseph
>>
>> Thanks for your answer.
>>
>> Do you know if the pooling of service implementation bean instances are
>> different between web service that is not EJBs (not annotated with
>> @Stateless) and those who are? That is if the pooling done by CXF for
>> service implementation beans differ from the stateless bean pooling in
>> WebSphere?
>>
>> Do you have any references to configure the pools CXF creates and/or the
>> ones WebSphere uses for pooling of stateless EJBs?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Lars-Fredrik
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Joseph Bergmark <bergmark@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't know much about the details of JSR 109 and JSR 224.
>>>
>>> That said I would not expect annotating a stateful EJB with
>>> @RequestScoped is not going to change how non-contexual references to that
>>> bean are managed from a lifecycle perspective.  Unless the JAX-WS
>>> implementation is obtaining a reference from the CDI container I would not
>>> expect any lifecycle changes.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Lars-Fredrik Smedberg <
>>> itsmeden@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> *Hi*
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure if this is the right group for the following questions....
>>>> I also posted it to the CXF user group. Any ideas/answers to any of the
>>>> following questions would be greatly appreciated!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I find nothing about the* life cycle of a service implementation bean* in
>>>> JSR181 and JSR224, the only reference there is to the lifecycle callback
>>>> methods (@PostConstruct and @PreDestroy).
>>>>
>>>> I can find information on the life cycle in* JSR109 in chapter "5.3.4
>>>> Service Implementation Bean Life Cycle".*
>>>>
>>>> *I have a few questions on 5.3.4*
>>>>
>>>> - Is it correct that the container / CXF can create any number (a pool)
>>>> of service implementation bean instances? The spec say "A container may
>>>> pool method ready instances of a Service Implementation Bean and dispatch
a
>>>> method
>>>> request on any instance in a method ready state."
>>>> - Is it correct that any given instance in the pool only can receive
>>>> one request at a time (why would it otherwise need the pool?)
>>>> - What is the min/max/other characteristics of this pool in CXF? Can it
>>>> be configured?
>>>>
>>>> For *JSR109 in 6.2.2.2 Handler Life Cycle with JAX-WS *I also have a
>>>> few questions
>>>>
>>>> - The spec say "Pooling of Handler instances is allowed, but is not
>>>> required.". Does CXF pool handler instances?
>>>> - The spec say "If Handler instances are pooled, they must be pooled by
>>>> Port component.". If CXF pool handler instances I assume they are pooled
>>>> per SEI?
>>>> - Can a given Handler instance receive multiple concurrent calls? I
>>>> assume that it cannot if its pooled and can if its not pooled? However the
>>>> spec is not very clear here so any input would be apreciated.
>>>>
>>>> Questions on the lifecycle* if the service implementations bean is a
>>>> stateless EJB* (annotated with @Stateless):
>>>>
>>>> - I assume that the life cycle now follows the life cycle of a
>>>> stateless EJB and that any pooling follows the pool setup for that specific
>>>> EJB?
>>>> - Will the life cycle of the Handlers still follow JSR109 6.2.2.2?
>>>>
>>>> Questions on the lifecycle if the *service implementation bean is a
>>>> stateful EJB* (annotated with @Stateful) *and is annotated so that the
>>>> lifecycle is managed by the CDI container, e.g. @RequestScoped.*
>>>>
>>>> - I assume that the life cycle now is managed according to the CDI
>>>> container life cycle rules?
>>>> - Will the life cycle of the Handlers still follow JSR109 6.2.2.2?
>>>>
>>>> We use WebSphere 8.5.5 and as far as we know it uses CXF 2.6.2. Has
>>>> anything changed from 2.6.2. with respect to the above questions? Does
>>>> anyone know if IBM has done any WebSphere specific changes to the CXF
>>>> bundled?
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Lars-Fredrik
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 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 itsmeden@gmail.com, 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 itsmeden@gmail.com, 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 itsmeden@gmail.com, and destroy all copies of this
message and any attachments.

Mime
View raw message