Re: Flexability of OpenEJB integration

[recursion <ba...@yahoo.com>]

Hi David,

I was wondering about your note on the JNDI impl:

> > JNDI implementation 
> 
> Not easily.  In Tomcat we use Tomcat's JNDI impl, in Geronimo we use   
> Geronimo's impl, but it's tricky to pull off. 

Can you elaborate a bit on that? I mean, JNDI has a well-defined SPI so it
shouldn't be that tricky to achieve this, isn't it?

Furthermore, as long as Geronimo uses OpenEJB as its EJB container, and can
use Tomcat as its web container, they should be made possible to use a
common JNDI provider in Geronimo.
Now, AFAIK standalone Tomcat uses the org.apache.naming impl
(http://directory.apache.org/subprojects/naming/) while Geronimo comes with
xbean-naming (http://geronimo.apache.org/xbean/). OpenEJB seems to have its
own JNDI impl although I noticed the xbean-naming bundle inside as well.
Is the above correct or am I totally missing something here?

Thank you in advance!

recursion.

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Flexability-of-OpenEJB-integration-tp24049853p25081540.html
Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Flexability of OpenEJB integration

[David Blevins <da...@visi.com>]

On Aug 21, 2009, at 8:01 AM, recursion wrote:

>
> Hi David,
>
> I was wondering about your note on the JNDI impl:
>
>>> JNDI implementation
>>
>> Not easily.  In Tomcat we use Tomcat's JNDI impl, in Geronimo we use
>> Geronimo's impl, but it's tricky to pull off.
>
> Can you elaborate a bit on that? I mean, JNDI has a well-defined SPI  
> so it
> shouldn't be that tricky to achieve this, isn't it?
>
> Furthermore, as long as Geronimo uses OpenEJB as its EJB container,  
> and can
> use Tomcat as its web container, they should be made possible to use a
> common JNDI provider in Geronimo.
> Now, AFAIK standalone Tomcat uses the org.apache.naming impl
> (http://directory.apache.org/subprojects/naming/) while Geronimo  
> comes with
> xbean-naming (http://geronimo.apache.org/xbean/). OpenEJB seems to  
> have its
> own JNDI impl although I noticed the xbean-naming bundle inside as  
> well.
> Is the above correct or am I totally missing something here?

We were going to use the xbean-naming implementation, but it turned  
out to be far slower than our own implementation so we opted to stay  
with what we had.  Bottom line is that there is no compliance test  
suite for JNDI implementations and all of them are slightly different.

If you're looking for details, this dev@ thread is full of them:

   http://www.nabble.com/jndi-independence-and-dependence-on-special-features-tt22878940.html

If you're still curious we should move this thread over to the dev list.

-David