portals-jetspeed-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Randy Watler <wat...@wispertel.net>
Subject Re: [jira] Commented: (JS2-326) Problem with LocalDataSourceConnectionFactory
Date Tue, 23 Aug 2005 14:25:24 GMT
Ate/Michael,

I might be able to provide feedback as well today... but I am not in 
complete control of my schedule :).

Thanks,

Randy

Ate Douma (JIRA) wrote:

>    [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JS2-326?page=comments#action_12319688 ] 
>
>Ate Douma commented on JS2-326:
>-------------------------------
>
>Thanks a lot for the quick response Michael.
>I  will test this out today!
>
>  
>
>>Problem with LocalDataSourceConnectionFactory
>>---------------------------------------------
>>
>>         Key: JS2-326
>>         URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JS2-326
>>     Project: Jetspeed 2
>>        Type: Bug
>>  Components: Persistence and DAO
>>    Versions: 2.0-M4
>> Environment: JBoss/HSQL
>>    Reporter: Michael Lipp
>> Attachments: j2-LocalDS-patches-20050811.txt.gz, j2-LocalDS-patches-20050817.txt.gz,
j2-LocalDS-patches-20050820.txt
>>
>>I'm trying to get the JBoss security module back to work after the changes made in
the recent weeks. The really big problem is that OJB.properties has changed and uses LocalDataSourceConnectionFactory
now:
>>ConnectionFactoryClass=org.springframework.orm.ojb.support.LocalDataSourceConnectionFactory
>>This is rather fatal (at least until we get and use dbojb 1.1). Let me briefly explain
why.
>>There is a problem when using dbojb in a library or framework or simply anything that
is meant to integrate with other code. The problem is the usage of static classes and singletons
for configuration in dbojb. It implies that you can configure only a single instance of OJB
(within the same classloader). The issue is known and to be resolved with dbojb 1.1 (http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?listName=ojb-dev@db.apache.org&msgNo=11150).
>>Jetspeed uses dbojb and is thus "in control" of dbojb. Anything that wants to use
dbojb too must either live with the configuration provided by Jetspeed (at least the parts
Jetspeed relies on, some things can certainly be changed in OJB.properties without breaking
Jetspeed) or somehow use dbojb in its own classloader (not that easily chievable in the J2EE
environment).
>>The JBoss security module for Jetspeed is provided by an MBean in the form of a "server
extension". Obviously, this MBean cannot depend on the deployment of some WebApplication (Jetspeed)
and therefore the MBean
>>needs its own "instance" of dbojb. Up to M3, this has been no problem because the
MBean simply used the dbojb classes with the configuration information also used by Jetspeed
and thus the Jetspeed web applications never "noticed" that it wasn't really them that instantiated
dbojb (or vice vera, whoever caused loading first). The MBean augmented the dbojb configuration,
however, by specifying a new JDBC connection description (using the API). This is necessary
because the datasource used by the web application is not available outside the web application.
This has been no problem, the JDBC connection description has simply been registered in the
dbojb ConnectionRepository as another connection that uses the "global" JNDI entry for the
data source.
>>All this has worked fine up to M3 because the ConnectionRepository is used to lookup
connections by the ConnectionFactoryManagedImpl. But currently, the LocalDataSourceConnectionFactory
is used in place of the ConnectionFactoryManagedImpl. This means that connection descriptions
are no longer looked up in the  ConnectionRespository but must rather exist in a specific
Spring BeanContext (set once). Of course, this is the BeanContext used (and set) by Jetspeed
and this context is not accessible outside Jetspeed, i.e. it is not  accessible by the MBean.
>>What has been achieved by using LocalDataSourceConnectionFactory? IMO very little:
the connection used by Jetspeed is now configured using a Spring controlled JavaBean instead
of providing the information in repository_database.xml. What has been lost? A lot: the possibility
to sustain (within the ojb configuration restrictions of Jetspeed) other data base connections
in parallel and thus use dbojb for more object persistence tasks in parallel to Jetspeed.
>>I therefore propose to revert this change. Configuration of the db connection in a
JavaBean could still be done (even better) by writing a JavaBean that creates the JDBC connection
description in the ConnectionRepository. Most of the code can be taken from JetspeedSecurityService.
boot/datasource.xml would instantiate this JavaBean and thus create the entry in the ConnectionRepository
(it is the currently used solution provided by Spring that  leads to the problems). There
would be another major advantage to this solution: dbojb 1.0.3 provides JdbcMetadataUtils.fillJCDFromDataSource
which can be used to obtain initial information for the JDBC connection descriptor from the
JDBC data source. Among this information is the value of "platform". I.e. we could get rid
of the necessity to provide this information by patching it in the maven scripts (ending up
with a WAR that can be deployed with a single RDBMS type only). The Jetspeed web application
would then automatically adapt to the  RDBMs used (as does JetspeedSecurityService already)!
>>As has been discussed on the developer's list I'm going to provide the patches for
the proposed change.
>>    
>>
>
>  
>



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-unsubscribe@portals.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-help@portals.apache.org


Mime
View raw message