1 2 3 4 5 6 Previous Next 82 Replies Latest reply: May 24, 2011 10:29 AM by Jason Greene Go to original post RSS
  • 75. Re: Resource Adapter integration on AS7
    Andy Taylor Master

    How about something like this as a default config:

     

              <managed-connection-factory name="hornetq-ra">

                   <connectors>

                      <connector-ref connector-name="in-vm" backup-connector-name="netty"/>

                   </connectors>

                   <entries>

                      <entry name="java:/JmsXA"/>

                   </entries>

                </managed-connection-factory>

     

    we add a managed-connection-factory type to distinguish between a hornetq cf and a RA managed cf, I think most users would understand the difference here. We need the attribute name as the MDB layer needs to know which Resource Adapter it needs to use, hornetq-ra could be the default.

     

    Since there are inbound properties that can be set we would need a way of just setting these as well, so maybe something like:

     

               <managed-connection-factory name="hornetq-ra">

                    <inbound>

                        <property name="useJndi">true</property>

                    </inbound>

                    <connectors>

                        <connector-ref connector-name="in-vm" backup-connector-name="netty"/>

                    </connectors>

                    <entries>

                        <entry name="java:/JmsXA"/>

                    </entries>

                </managed-connection-factory>

     

    I find this slightly non intuitive, setting resource adapter inbound properties on a connection factory seems a bit weird but maybe thats just me.

     

    thoughts guys?

  • 76. Re: Resource Adapter integration on AS7
    Clebert Suconic Master

    Why do you need the useJndi property on the inbound?

     

    A dream come true would be every managed-connection would serve as an inbound without any other changes.

     

    You just define the managed-connection-factory, and that's it!  No more inbound definitions. Every Managed-connection would serve as the inbound provider.

  • 77. Resource Adapter integration on AS7
    Andy Taylor Master

    after chatting with Clebert we have decided on this

     

    <managed-connection-factory name="hornetq-ra">

                    <inbound-config>

                        <useJndi>true</useJndi>

                    </inbound-config>

                    <connectors>

                        <connector-ref connector-name="in-vm" backup-connector-name="netty"/>

                    </connectors>

                    <entries>

                        <entry name="java:/JmsXA"/>

                    </entries>

                </managed-connection-factory>

  • 78. Resource Adapter integration on AS7
    Jason Greene Master

    Andy Taylor wrote:

     

    after chatting with Clebert we have decided on this

     

    <managed-connection-factory name="hornetq-ra">

                    <inbound-config>

                        <useJndi>true</useJndi>

                    </inbound-config>

                    <connectors>

                        <connector-ref connector-name="in-vm" backup-connector-name="netty"/>

                    </connectors>

                    <entries>

                        <entry name="java:/JmsXA"/>

                    </entries>

                </managed-connection-factory>

    In general I think this is looking much cleaner!

     

    Although IMO I think we should avoid overloading "managed". We already have the notion of things being managed and unmanaged, and we may decide to do unmanaged queues/topics that are deployable one day.

     

    How about "advanced"?

     

    IMO "jndi-binding" is easier to follow over entry, which is a bit too generic. Also I assume in most cases there will only be one so we probably don't need an outer group element. We can just allow multiple jndi-binding tags to appear.

     

    This brings me to connectors. Can you normally have multiple ones per Connection Factory?

     

    Could you expand on the need for use jndi that Clebert asked?

  • 79. Resource Adapter integration on AS7
    Andy Taylor Master

    Although IMO I think we should avoid overloading "managed". We already have the notion of things being managed and unmanaged, and we may decide to do unmanaged queues/topics that are deployable one day.

     

    How about "advanced"?

    advanced implies extra functionality when it actually has less, how about JEE or pooled?

     

    IMO "jndi-binding" is easier to follow over entry, which is a bit too generic. Also I assume in most cases there will only be one so we probably don't need an outer group element. We can just allow multiple jndi-binding tags to appear.

    for this type of connection factory yes but for a hornetq there is typically always more than one and we should keep the same format, altho jndi-binding does sound better. saying this I wouldlike to get this up and running and into trunk before i start changing the current model. I'll do this stuff under a separate JIRA

     

    This brings me to connectors. Can you normally have multiple ones per Connection Factory?

    Yes, this is for HA, i.e. connect to any one of these available servers.

     

    Could you expand on the need for use jndi that Clebert asked?

    Its just one of a few properties that is only used for inbound connections, it means use jndi to locate the destination feeding the MDB rather than core API. others are jndiParams, setupAttempts (for connecting to a server/destination) and there are a few others

  • 80. Re: Resource Adapter integration on AS7
    Clebert Suconic Master

    As far as I remember, from 7 years ago when I used to be a consultant (man, I'm getting old), other application servers would call it pooled-connection-factory through their visual tools.

     

    So I guess it would make sense to use pooled instead.

  • 81. Re: Resource Adapter integration on AS7
    Jason Greene Master

    Clebert Suconic wrote:

     

    As far as I remember, from 7 years ago when I used to be a consultant (man, I'm getting old), other application servers would call it pooled-connection-factory through their visual tools.

     

    So I guess it would make sense to use pooled instead.

     

    Yeah I like pooled

  • 82. Re: Resource Adapter integration on AS7
    Jason Greene Master

    Andy Taylor wrote:

     

    Although IMO I think we should avoid overloading "managed". We already have the notion of things being managed and unmanaged, and we may decide to do unmanaged queues/topics that are deployable one day.

     

    How about "advanced"?

    advanced implies extra functionality when it actually has less, how about JEE or pooled?

     

    IMO "jndi-binding" is easier to follow over entry, which is a bit too generic. Also I assume in most cases there will only be one so we probably don't need an outer group element. We can just allow multiple jndi-binding tags to appear.

    for this type of connection factory yes but for a hornetq there is typically always more than one and we should keep the same format, altho jndi-binding does sound better. saying this I wouldlike to get this up and running and into trunk before i start changing the current model. I'll do this stuff under a separate JIRA

    Ok Thats fine. I also will pitch in since Im being so demanding!

1 2 3 4 5 6 Previous Next