Menu
▾
▴
springframework-developer
|
From: <jue...@we...> - 2003-11-18 17:52:02
|
Bruce Tate is indeed a Spring fan, not only does he promote Spring at = the "No Fluff, Just Stuff" conference series but also... http://www.theserverside.com/home/thread.jsp?thread_id=3D22481 The essence? Spring and Hibernate are a viable way to battle J2EE = complexity. It makes me rejoice to see this message getting spread by = someone who isn't affiliated with the projects at all! Juergen DI J=FCrgen H=F6ller Senior System Architect ______________________________________ werk3ATS - division systementwicklung werk3AT informations- und mediensysteme europaplatz 4 A - 4020 linz t. +43 (0) 732 71 65 29 502 f. +43 (0) 732 71 65 29 3 mailto:jue...@we... http://www.werk3at.com ______________________________________ werk3ATS - WIR ENTWICKELN ERFOLG |
|
From: <tri...@tr...> - 2003-11-18 18:49:17
|
Jürgen & Rod, This is fantastic. To have "Mr. Bitter Java/EJB" endorse your lightweight Java framework is going to attract a lot of interest. I have noticed a lot more messages on the mailing list lately, it might quadrupel the next few weeks. Congratulations on some well deserved recognition. Thomas Quoting "jürgen höller [werk3AT]" <jue...@we...>: > Bruce Tate is indeed a Spring fan, not only does he promote Spring at the "No > Fluff, Just Stuff" conference series but also... > http://www.theserverside.com/home/thread.jsp?thread_id=22481 > > The essence? Spring and Hibernate are a viable way to battle J2EE complexity. > It makes me rejoice to see this message getting spread by someone who isn't > affiliated with the projects at all! > > Juergen > > > DI Jürgen Höller > Senior System Architect > ______________________________________ > > werk3ATS - division systementwicklung > werk3AT informations- und mediensysteme > > europaplatz 4 > A - 4020 linz > > t. +43 (0) 732 71 65 29 502 > f. +43 (0) 732 71 65 29 3 > mailto:jue...@we... > http://www.werk3at.com > ______________________________________ > werk3ATS - WIR ENTWICKELN ERFOLG > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. > Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive? Does it > help you create better code? SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help > YOU! Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/ > _______________________________________________ > Springframework-developer mailing list > Spr...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer > |
|
From: Ross M. <ro...@at...> - 2004-01-06 22:36:09
|
BTW congratulations on the M4 release guys! We moved to it yesterday without any problems. Cheers, Ross |
|
From: Ross M. <ro...@at...> - 2004-02-04 02:43:45
|
Hi guys, I've just found some interesting behaviour in the spring container. If we have 96 beans in the container everything works fine, but if we add one more bean, say bean97, the container complains that there may be a circular reference even though I'm sure there isn't. But if we remove a different (and totally unrelated) bean and add our bean97 bean it works fine. It seems the container has a bean threshold of 96?! Basically, we cannot add any than 96 beans to the container. Have you seen this behaviour before? -- Cheers, Ross http://blog.rossmason.com |
|
From: Mike Cannon-B. <mi...@at...> - 2004-02-04 03:29:33
|
Obviously this is a big problem to us right now (doh), as Confluence has just passed 96 beans in Spring (yay!). Charles and I have just been investigating in more detail, it seems that as soon as we add the _97th_ bean, one of our _circular_ references barfs. We'll investigate further - but any ideas as to where to look would be most appreciated :) Cheers, Mike PS It may also be some sort of a limit in the number of circular referenced beans, or singletons? I'm not sure. On 4/2/04 1:43 PM, "Ross Mason" (ro...@at...) penned the words: > Hi guys, > > I've just found some interesting behaviour in the spring container. If > we have 96 beans in the container everything works fine, but if we add > one more bean, say bean97, the container complains that there may be a > circular reference even though I'm sure there isn't. But if we remove a > different (and totally unrelated) bean and add our bean97 bean it works > fine. It seems the container has a bean threshold of 96?! > > Basically, we cannot add any than 96 beans to the container. > > Have you seen this behaviour before? > > -- > Cheers, > > Ross > http://blog.rossmason.com > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 > Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration > See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. > http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn > _______________________________________________ > Springframework-developer mailing list > Spr...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer |
|
From: Colin S. <col...@ex...> - 2004-02-04 03:46:04
|
Damn it, I told the guys that 96 beans wasn't enought, but they wouldn't listen to me... Just kidding. If somebody else doesn't get to it by then, I think I can look at this on Thurs... Mike Cannon-Brookes wrote: >Obviously this is a big problem to us right now (doh), as Confluence has >just passed 96 beans in Spring (yay!). > >Charles and I have just been investigating in more detail, it seems that as >soon as we add the _97th_ bean, one of our _circular_ references barfs. > >We'll investigate further - but any ideas as to where to look would be most >appreciated :) > >Cheers, >Mike > >PS It may also be some sort of a limit in the number of circular referenced >beans, or singletons? I'm not sure. > >On 4/2/04 1:43 PM, "Ross Mason" (ro...@at...) penned the words: > > > >>Hi guys, >> >>I've just found some interesting behaviour in the spring container. If >>we have 96 beans in the container everything works fine, but if we add >>one more bean, say bean97, the container complains that there may be a >>circular reference even though I'm sure there isn't. But if we remove a >>different (and totally unrelated) bean and add our bean97 bean it works >>fine. It seems the container has a bean threshold of 96?! >> >>Basically, we cannot add any than 96 beans to the container. >> >>Have you seen this behaviour before? >> >>-- >>Cheers, >> >>Ross >>http://blog.rossmason.com >> >> |
