[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmlblaster-devel] Announce: JMS
Peter Antman wrote:
I had a first look at it, seems that its some more coding to do ;-)
Of course, but I hope it was at least sufficient to start a discussion ;)
The idea isto implement the 1.1 api, the simple example
Some comments and questions though.
1. It seems as if its not written agains JMS 1.1. That would be nicer,
since JMS 1.1 contains a unified API:
ConnectionFactory f = ctx.lookup("TopicFactory");
Destination d = ctx.lookup("my/topic")
Connection c = f.createConnection();
Session s = c.createSession(false,Session.AUTO_ACKNOWLEDGE);
MessageProducer p = s.createProducer(d);
Message m = s.createTextMessage("MyMessage");
though is based on the 1.0.2, so the first interfaces implemented are
the ones used in the example. Regarding the lookup it is still an open
issue but I believe your GlobalUtil solves the most of the problems and
the rest are probably just details.
2. It would be swell if the different QoS could also be defined in the
looked up components. I have always (and still have) found it hard to
really get a good view of all the configurable properties in the QoS,
but basically I would say this: stuff that is connected to the
destination (queue setting, exact/xpath, mm) should be configured in the
Destination (XBTopic), everything else, that is not part of the JMS API,
should be configurable in Factory.
About the XPath I was thinking of having virtual topics which in effect
consist of an XPATH query (either as the topic name or via some
xmlBlaster specific setters/getters). The big question here is how these
topics would be administrated. To make is feasible there should be a
mechanism to create topics on the fly if none with the used name is
found. The other option would be to only allow a certain amount of xpath
queries. For the first option I currently only can imagine to acheave
this with an own InitialContext. I think however that we should tackle
this problem in a second phase since this in not even specified/required
by the jms specification (that's a nice plus for xmlBlaster users ;))
About the Qos I am not sure I understood you right: would you have ready
qos objects registered in the naming service which one can lookup with
given names ? Some of the features in the qos map 1:1 to JMS so there
are already setters/getters specified, for the other more xmlBlaster
specific there is always the generic way of setting these properties
3. The factory today takes an Global. As far as I know this will not
work in a standard app-server scenarion where you would want to bind the
factory into JNDI, which means it must be Serializable, or the some of
the Reference tricks.
Yes, as said before your GlobalUtil should make the trick.
That's an old issue and it has been discussed in the past on different
occasions. Personally I would see this as a specific implementation of
the DispatcherPlugin where all messages are for only one client: wrapped
in a Queue object. Jms clients would send a message to that Queue. Every
session of that xmlBlaster client would be a "QueueConsumer" (in jms
terminology) and the dispatcher plugin would give the message to the
first consumer available. This way the classical MQ-Series "first to the
base" behaviour would be simulated. By implementing it as a plugin we
could easily switch to other approaches, for example a more complex load
balancer where the plugin could keep track of earlier processing times
for the different consumers and distribute the messages in a more
4. How are you planing to implement the Queue destination? If I have
understood XMlBlaster correct, there are no support for that type of
stack based destinations.
Another important open question is the implementation of the
QueueIterator on which I did'nt spend any attention yet.
Any ideas on how the selectors will work, or will will that be a non
standard part, where selectors is substituted with XPath expressions?
I believe the best place to do the filtering is in the AccessPlugin. The
syntax to be used I would prefere the standard way and exclude Xpath. We
use xpath to filter the topics (is "transtopically" a good word ?). For
selections in the same topic (is "panatopically" a good word ?) it would
be best to keep is as jms-standard as possible.
Did you have any thoughts about this ?
On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 20:51, Michele Laghi wrote:
a first step has been made to make xmlBlaster among other things a *JMS
Provider*. The initial code is on org.xmlBlaster.j2ee.jms. The code is
far from functional yet, but there is already a very simple working demo
with a topic publishing and subscribing on
Many of you have already done quite a lot of work with xmlBlaster in
conjunction with jms, so as always:
comments, ideas, suggestions and *code* are all welcome !
mailto:laghi at swissinfo.org
tel. +46 8 7492952 / mob. +46 70 4103964