Re: [activemq-dev] Re: [Springframework-developer] Re: [activemq-dev] Re: message driven POJOs, a lightweight JCA container available

[Eugene K. <eu...@md...>]

James Strachan wrote:

>> I think Eugene has a point.
>>
>> The work manager isn't the problem, it's integrating message delivery 
>> to mdbs without container support.  This is going to be even more 
>> unlikely to work for CMT mdbs.
>>
>> If you want to use your spring psuedo-mdbs inside a j2ee container, 
>> there's still the problem of transactional message delivery.  There's 
>> no standard way to find the TM and even if you get it I would 
>> investigate extensively before thinking that using it directly will 
>> give you the correct semantics.
> 
> Agreed - though we're delegating to Spring for this issue....

   By the way, there was a huge discussion related to CMT and Spring 
manged transaction and as far as I remember everybody agreed that in 
general it is a bad idea to mix those.

>> For instance,  in Geronimo I'm fairly sure it would not since we wrap 
>> the JTA objects with more context.
>>
>> So this spring thing looks pretty cool but is unlikely to be of much 
>> use in j2ee non 1.4 containers.  But, why not use a j2ee 1.4 container 
>> anyway?:-)
> Exactly!

   Can you guys remind me all J2EE 1.4 containers that already released 
and how long ago? :-)

> If you're in a J2ee 1.4 container, you might was well just deploy MDBs. 
> This is more for cases where you're not in a J2EE container, such as 
> you're using just Tomcat + Spring and want the effect of MDBs coupled 
> with the dependency injection of Spring and using Spring as the 
> transaction manager (which has hooks to JTA or could plug in to 
> Geronimo's TM etc).

   By the way, speaking about Tomkat + Spring, I wonder where you going 
to get transaction manager. If I'm not mistaken Spring only provide 
delegators, so coordination between JMS and JDBC tx resources could be 
an issue.

> If you need the J2EE features, just use a J2EE container!

   That bring me back to 1.3 container. :-)
   So, personally I'm ok with MDB's, maybe except the fact that you 
can't really create consumers on the fly using some standard way (not 
counting container-specific JMX magic).

   regards,
   Eugene