Search Results

Search found 267 results on 11 pages for 'stateless'.

Page 1/11 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  | Next Page >

  • Is RTD Stateless or Stateful?

    - by [email protected]
    Yes.   A stateless service is one where each request is an independent transaction that can be processed by any of the servers in a cluster.  A stateful service is one where state is kept in a server's memory from transaction to transaction, thus necessitating the proper routing of requests to the right server. The main advantage of stateless systems is simplicity of design. The main advantage of stateful systems is performance. I'm often asked whether RTD is a stateless or stateful service, so I wanted to clarify this issue in depth so that RTD's architecture will be properly understood. The short answer is: "RTD can be configured as a stateless or stateful service." The performance difference between stateless and stateful systems can be very significant, and while in a call center implementation it may be reasonable to use a pure stateless configuration, a web implementation that produces thousands of requests per second is practically impossible with a stateless configuration. RTD's performance is orders of magnitude better than most competing systems. RTD was architected from the ground up to achieve this performance. Features like automatic and dynamic compression of prediction models, automatic translation of metadata to machine code, lack of interpreted languages, and separation of model building from decisioning contribute to achieving this performance level. Because  of this focus on performance we decided to have RTD's default configuration work in a stateful manner. By being stateful RTD requests are typically handled in a few milliseconds when repeated requests come to the same session. Now, those readers that have participated in implementations of RTD know that RTD's architecture is also focused on reducing Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) with features like automatic model building, automatic time windows, automatic maintenance of database tables, automatic evaluation of data mining models, automatic management of models partitioned by channel, geography, etcetera, and hot swapping of configurations. How do you reconcile the need for a low TCO and the need for performance? How do you get the performance of a stateful system with the simplicity of a stateless system? The answer is that you make the system behave like a stateless system to the exterior, but you let it automatically take advantage of situations where being stateful is better. For example, one of the advantages of stateless systems is that you can route a message to any server in a cluster, without worrying about sending it to the same server that was handling the session in previous messages. With an RTD stateful configuration you can still route the message to any server in the cluster, so from the point of view of the configuration of other systems, it is the same as a stateless service. The difference though comes in performance, because if the message arrives to the right server, RTD can serve it without any external access to the session's state, thus tremendously reducing processing time. In typical implementations it is not rare to have high percentages of messages routed directly to the right server, while those that are not, are easily handled by forwarding the messages to the right server. This architecture usually provides the best of both worlds with performance and simplicity of configuration.   Configuring RTD as a pure stateless service A pure stateless configuration requires session data to be persisted at the end of handling each and every message and reloading that data at the beginning of handling any new message. This is of course, the root of the inefficiency of these configurations. This is also the reason why many "stateless" implementations actually do keep state to take advantage of a request coming back to the same server. Nevertheless, if the implementation requires a pure stateless decision service, this is easy to configure in RTD. The way to do it is: Mark every Integration Point to Close the session at the end of processing the message In the Session entity persist the session data on closing the session In the session entity check if a persisted version exists and load it An excellent solution for persisting the session data is Oracle Coherence, which provides a high performance, distributed cache that minimizes the performance impact of persisting and reloading the session. Alternatively, the session can be persisted to a local database. An interesting feature of the RTD stateless configuration is that it can cope with serializing concurrent requests for the same session. For example, if a web page produces two requests to the decision service, these requests could come concurrently to the decision services and be handled by different servers. Most stateless implementation would have the two requests step onto each other when saving the state, or fail one of the messages. When properly configured, RTD will make one message wait for the other before processing.   A Word on Context Using the context of a customer interaction typically significantly increases lift. For example, offer success in a call center could double if the context of the call is taken into account. For this reason, it is important to utilize the contextual information in decision making. To make the contextual information available throughout a session it needs to be persisted. When there is a well defined owner for the information then there is no problem because in case of a session restart, the information can be easily retrieved. If there is no official owner of the information, then RTD can be configured to persist this information.   Once again, RTD provides flexibility to ensure high performance when it is adequate to allow for some loss of state in the rare cases of server failure. For example, in a heavy use web site that serves 1000 pages per second the navigation history may be stored in the in memory session. In such sites it is typical that there is no OLTP that stores all the navigation events, therefore if an RTD server were to fail, it would be possible for the navigation to that point to be lost (note that a new session would be immediately established in one of the other servers). In most cases the loss of this navigation information would be acceptable as it would happen rarely. If it is desired to save this information, RTD would persist it every time the visitor navigates to a new page. Note that this practice is preferred whether RTD is configured in a stateless or stateful manner.  

    Read the article

  • Wicket: stateless AJAX behaviors in stateful page without serialization

    - by mschayna
    I have pretty stateful page with plenty of AJAX components. Most of these components have behaviors, which renders JavaScript code for calling AJAX requests to Java code. Because page isn't stateless, each request causes serialization of page. So far so good. But some of these AJAX requests doesn't change page ever, so serialization of page isn't necessary. For example it is forward caching data for (home-brewed) datagrid component. These requests are calling continuously and serialization of page during each request causes delays. There are some projects for stateless wicket components out there, e.g. wicket-stateless, but it solves another situation -- request of stateless components are processed on new instances of stateless pages. I want to process requests on existing stateful page instance but without serialization. I have tried to implement this in my own RequestCycleProcessor.resolve(), but I hung on searching for page from requestParameters because Session.getPage() always touches page and it causes serialization after request processing. Is there any example, idea, whatever for implementing this in Wicket? Hope it's understandable :)

    Read the article

  • Stateful vs. Stateless Webservices

    - by chrsk
    Imagine a more complex CRUD application which has a three-tier-architecture and communicates over webservices. The client starts a conversation to the server and doing some wizard like stuff. To process the wizard the client needs feedback given by the server. We started a discussion about stateful or stateless webservices for this approach. I made some research combined with my own experience, which points me to the question mentioned later. Stateless webservices having the following properties (in our case): + high scalability + high availability + high speed + rapid testing - bloated contract - implementing more logic on server-side But we can cross out the first two points, our application doesn't needs high scalability and availability. So we come to the stateful webservice. I've read a bunch of blogs and forum posts and the most invented point implementing a stateful webservice was: + simplifies contract (protocol) - bad testing - runs counter to the basic architecture of http But doesn't almost all web applications have these bad points? Web applications uses cookies, query strings, session ids, and all the stuff to avoid the statelessness of http. So why is it that bad for webservices?

    Read the article

  • Weblogic 10.3.0 : Loosing a stateless session bean in the bean pool

    - by KlasE
    Hi, We have a strange situation where we loose a Stateless SessionBean in a Bean Pool in Weblogic 10.3.0 Since we only have one bean in the pool, this effectively hangs all incoming calls. We do not want more than one instance in the pool because of application restrictions. In the Weblogic admin console, we can see that there are 1 instance in the bean pool, 0 beans in use and 1 waiting incoming request. The question is, what can have caused the system to not send the request to the one obviously free bean instance? This happens after several hours and over 100000 incoming requests, and the same scenario worked fine in the old weblogic 8 environment. We get the following stacktrace: "[ACTIVE] ExecuteThread: '5' for queue: 'weblogic.kernel.Default (self-tuning)'" waiting for lock java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionObject@b0d484 TIMED_WAITING sun.misc.Unsafe.park(Native Method) java.util.concurrent.locks.LockSupport.parkNanos(LockSupport.java:198) java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionObject.await(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:2054) weblogic.ejb.container.pool.StatelessSessionPool.waitForBean(StatelessSessionPool.java:269) weblogic.ejb.container.pool.StatelessSessionPool.getBean(StatelessSessionPool.java:111) weblogic.ejb.container.manager.StatelessManager.preInvoke(StatelessManager.java:148) weblogic.ejb.container.internal.BaseRemoteObject.preInvoke(BaseRemoteObject.java:227) weblogic.ejb.container.internal.StatelessRemoteObject.preInvoke(StatelessRemoteObject.java:52) com.mycompany.beans.MessageLogFacace_n73y0z_EOImpl.isMyStuffValid(MessageLogFacace_n73y0z_EOImpl.java:261) com.mycompany.beans.MessageLogFacace_n73y0z_EOImpl_WLSkel.invoke(Unknown Source) weblogic.rmi.internal.BasicServerRef.invoke(BasicServerRef.java:589) weblogic.rmi.cluster.ClusterableServerRef.invoke(ClusterableServerRef.java:230) weblogic.rmi.internal.BasicServerRef$1.run(BasicServerRef.java:477) weblogic.security.acl.internal.AuthenticatedSubject.doAs(AuthenticatedSubject.java:363) weblogic.security.service.SecurityManager.runAs(Unknown Source) weblogic.rmi.internal.BasicServerRef.handleRequest(BasicServerRef.java:473) weblogic.rmi.internal.wls.WLSExecuteRequest.run(WLSExecuteRequest.java:118) weblogic.work.ExecuteThread.execute(ExecuteThread.java:201) weblogic.work.ExecuteThread.run(ExecuteThread.java:173) Any help would be very welcome. Regards Klas

    Read the article

  • What's the difference between stateful and stateless?

    - by Pankaj Upadhyay
    The books and documentation on the MVC just heap on using the Stateful and Stateless terms. To be honest, i am just unable to grab the idea of it, what the books are talking about. They don't give an example to understand any of the either state, rather than just telling that HTTP is stateless and with ASP.NET MVC microsoft is going along with it. Am I missing some fundamental knowledge, as i can't understand what is stateful and why is stateful and same goes for stateless. A simple and short example that talks about a control like button or textbox can be simplify the understanding i suppose.

    Read the article

  • How to turn iptables stateless?

    - by tex
    Hi, I'm running a Linux server that - from time to time - faces heavy load and the conntrack table overflows. Since it's iptables firewall ruleset is very simple I'd like to turn it to stateless mode. I know that iptables can operate in stateful connection tracking mode and in a stateless mode. My firewall rules are all in place I'm pretty sure that they are stateless but my question is how can I verify that the firewall is really operating in stateless mode?

    Read the article

  • Stateless layout switching in Ubuntu 14.04

    - by ulidtko
    I use extensively two keyboard layouts (latin for English, and cyrillic for Ukrainian and Russian), and it bothers me to experience my mode errors because of the additional bit of UI state: the current layout. I used to eliminate them completely by using stateless layout switching, whereby one has no next layout action (as such an action is based on the current state, which is easy to forget for the user, and so leads to errors), rather only two actions: enable latin layout; enable cyrillic layout. This was trivially accomplishable in pre-Saucy releases. As illustrated on the screenshot above. However, that settings window was destroyed in Saucy. How do I get my stateless switching now?

    Read the article

  • Stateless game design

    - by L. De Leo
    I'm facing a challenge understanding how to program a web version of a card game that is completely stateless. I create my object graph when the game begins and distribute cards to PlayerA and PlayerB so I lay them out on the screen. At this point I could assume that HTML and the querystring is what holds at least some of my state and just keep a snapshot copy of the game state on the server-side for the sole purpose of validating the inputs I receive from the web clients. Still it appears to me that the state of the game is by its nature mutable: cards are being dealt from the deck, etc... Am I just not getting it? Or should I just strive to minimize the side-effects of my functions to the objects that I take as my input? How would you design a stateless card game?

    Read the article

  • @WebServices as @Stateless session bean in ejb jar

    - by kislo_metal
    Hi! Scenario: Creating some web service as @Stateless bean, package it as ejb jar. Result - can`t access to wsdl file. Goal: I want to use @WebServices as @Stateless session using ejb jar packaging with accessible wsdl file form web. Web service: @Stateless @WebService(serviceName = "ws.isp.SecurityService", wsdlLocation = "META-INF/wsdl/SecurityService.wsdl") public class SecurityService{ @EJB private Kerberos factory; @EJB private UsersServiceBean uService; public SecurityService() { } @WebMethod @WebResult(name = "SimpleResponse") public SimpleResponse LogOut( @WebParam(name = "sessionUUID", targetNamespace = "https://secure.co.ua/ws/") String sessionUUID ) { SimpleResponse resp = new SimpleResponse(); try{ factory.removeSession(sessionUUID); resp.setError(WSErrorCodes.SUCCESS); }catch (Exception e){ e.printStackTrace(); resp.setError(WSErrorCodes.UNRELOSVED_ERROR); } return resp; } @WebMethod public MySession logIn( @WebParam(name = "username", targetNamespace = "https://secure.co.ua/ws/") String username, @WebParam(name = "password", targetNamespace = "https://secure.co.ua/ws/") String password){ MySession result = new MySession(); try { UserSession us = factory.creatSession(uService.getUser(username, password).getId()); result.setSessionID(us.getSessionUUID().toString()); result.setError(WSErrorCodes.SUCCESS); } catch (NullPointerException e){ e.printStackTrace(); result.setError(WSErrorCodes.UNRELOSVED_USER); } catch (Exception e){ e.printStackTrace(); result.setError(WSErrorCodes.UNRELOSVED_ERROR); } return result; } } In this case I getting Invalid wsdl request http://192.168.44.48:8181/ws.isp.SecurityService/SecurityService when I try to access to wsdl and if do not use description of wsdlLocation I getting blank page. Web service as it self working good. Q1: what is the rule of describing wsdl file location for web services as stateless in ejb jar. Q2: is it possible to generate wsdl file during maven packaging ? Q3: how to generate wsdl file for web service where we have such annotation as @Stateless and @EJB (currently I can generate it only by commenting those annotations) environment: mave 2, ejb 3.1, glassfish v3, jax-ws 2.x Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Stateful beans and Stateless beans in Spring context

    - by umesh awasthi
    Hi All, i am reading spring through its official documentation and at one place i came to a line that use prototype scope for for all statefull beans while singleton for stateless beans. i know there is something as statefull as well stateless beans in EJB but this is not what they have mentioned in the documents. Can any one explain me what exact this means of statefull as well stateless beans in Spring Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Connecting to a secure, graphical, x session using a stateless thin client

    - by npeterson
    I'm looking for an open source, non-proprietery solution to this problem, any help would be appreciated. I'd like to setup a server running Ubuntu Server. I'd then like to connect to this server from a stateless thin client and use an x-session. This would occur mostly over local area networks, but also possibly over the internet. What would be the ideal set of software to accomplish this from a security, and usability standpoint? Are there any ready-made stateless thin clients that don't require proprietery software?

    Read the article

  • Appropriate to Stateless Autoconfigure a Server?

    - by user31498
    I am setting up a network to support IPv6. Stateless Autoconfiguration seems to be the preferred way to get an IP address on an IPv6 network but is this the preferred way for a server? Other machines outside of the network are going to need to be able to talk to the server. Is it preferable to give the server a static IP address or is there something fancy that can be done with DNS to keep track of the server address?

    Read the article

  • Facebook and a stateless server

    - by Fahim Akhter
    I am making a Facebook application, I want to have a stateless server.The Facebook connect requests are from the server side. So when Facebook gives me a session which has to be maintained at the server this way my server won't be stateless. When I'll load balance I can't have a simple load balancer instead it would need to know which users are on which server, something I don't want. Any Ideas?

    Read the article

  • Is the web still 100% Stateless?

    - by coffeeaddict
    Is the web sill 100% stateless? Before you start to say "of course it is, wtf" listen to what I'm saying here. I'm starting to wonder about this because web servers are definitely caching things, keeping connections open in connection pools, etc. So you can't really stay it's 100% stateless anymore. Am I right on this?

    Read the article

  • help on ejb stateless datagram and message driven beans

    - by Kemmal
    i have a client thats sending a message to the ejbserver using UDP, i want the server(stateless bean) to echo back this message to the client but i cant seem to do this. or can i implement the same logic by using JMS? please help and enlighten. this is just a test, in the end i want a midp to be sending the message to the ejb using datagrams. here is my code. @Stateless public class SessionFacadeBean implements SessionFacadeRemote { public SessionFacadeBean() { } public static void main(String[] args) { DatagramSocket aSocket = null; byte[] buffer = null; try { while(true) { DatagramPacket request = new DatagramPacket(buffer, buffer.length); aSocket.receive(request); DatagramPacket reply = new DatagramPacket(request.getData(), request.getLength(), request.getAddress(), request.getPort()); aSocket.send(reply); } } catch (SocketException e) { System.out.println("Socket: " + e.getMessage()); } catch (IOException e) { System.out.println("IO: " + e.getMessage()); } finally { if(aSocket != null) aSocket.close(); } } } and the client: public static void main(String[] args) { DatagramSocket aSocket = null; try { aSocket = new DatagramSocket(); byte [] m = "Test message!".getBytes(); InetAddress aHost = InetAddress.getByName("localhost"); int serverPort = 6789; DatagramPacket request = new DatagramPacket(m, m.length, aHost, serverPort); aSocket.send(request); byte[] buffer = new byte[1000]; DatagramPacket reply = new DatagramPacket(buffer, buffer.length); aSocket.receive(reply); System.out.println("Reply: " + new String(reply.getData())); } catch (SocketException e) { System.out.println("Socket: " + e.getMessage()); } catch (IOException e) { System.out.println("IO: " + e.getMessage()); } finally { if(aSocket != null) aSocket.close(); } } please help.

    Read the article

  • Is there Linq to Nhibernate for stateless session?

    - by Jenea
    I was using regular session for loading some items from database via linq. The problem is that it caches the entities and memory load increases very much unnecessarily. Is there a way to replace session with stateless session without introducing many changes in client code?

    Read the article

  • Stateless singleton VS Static methods

    - by Sebastien Lorber
    Hey, Don't find any good answer to this simple question about helper/utils classes: Why would i create a singleton (stateless) rather than static methods? Why an object instance could be needed while the object has no state? Sometimes i really don't know what to use...

    Read the article

  • Stateless NHibernate for querying

    - by JontyMC
    We have a database that is updated via a background process. We are using NHibernate to query the data for display on the web UI, so we don't need change tracking or lazy-loading. If we mark all the mappings as mutable="false", is this the same as using a stateless session?

    Read the article

  • JBoss Seam: components injected into POJOs, but not Session Beans

    - by purecharger
    I have a Seam component that handles login, with the name "authenticator": @Name("authenticator") public class AuthenticatorAction implements Authenticator { @PersistenceContext private EntityManager em; @In(required=false) @Out(required=false, scope = SESSION) private User user; public boolean authenticate(){ ... } } This works just fine, Seam injects the EntityManager instance. However, as soon as I add the @Stateless annotation, none of the injection happens! In this case, the EntityManager instance is null upon entry to the authenticate() method. Another interesting note is that with a separate stateful session bean I have, the Logger instance in that class is only injected if I make it static. If i have it non-static, it is not injected. Thats fine for the logger, but for stateless session beans like that, I obviously can't have static member variables for these components. I'm confused because this authenticator is exactly how it is in the Seam booking example: a stateless session bean with a private member variable being injected. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Managing Unique IDs in stateless (web) DB4O applications

    - by Phil.Wheeler
    I'm playing around with building a new web application using DB4O - piles of fun and some really interesting stuff learned. The one thing I'm struggling with is DB4O's current lack of support for stateless applications (i.e. web apps, mostly) and the need for automatically-generated IDs. There are a number of creative and interesting approaches that I've been able to find that hook into DB4O's events, use GUIDs rather than numeric IDs or for whatever reason avoid using any system of ID at all. While each approach has its merits, I'm wondering if the less-elegant approach might equally be the best fit. Consider the following pseudo-code: If ID == 0 or null Set ID = (typeof(myObject)).Count myObject.Save It seems like such a blindingly simple approach, it's usually about here that I start thinking, "I've missed something really obvious". Have I?

    Read the article

  • RESTFul, statelesness and sessions

    - by Per Arneng
    RESTFul service has a rule that it should be stateless. By beeing that it does not allow a session to be created and maintained by sending a session key between the client and the server and then holding a session state on the server. If i look at the definition in wikipedia of stateless server http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stateless_server "A stateless server is a server that treats each request as an independent transaction that is unrelated to any previous request" It states that it should be unrelated to any previous request. In practice this means that any type of authentication will be comparing the credentials of a user to a state on the server that was created by a previous operation. So a service called login is related to and dependent on the state that has been created by previous requests (ex: create_user and/or change_password). In my view you are breaking statelessnes by doing authentication. My point is that people are complaining about having sessions in RESTFul is breaking statelesness but doing authentication is also breaking the same rule. What do you think?

    Read the article

  • @Stateless, @Remote and @Local

    - by Jeff Foster
    In my deployment on JBoss 5.1.0GA with JavaEE-5 I have beans of the general form public interface Foo { void baz (); } @Stateless public class FooBean implements Foo { void baz() { // ... } } I have assumed that this is the same as if I have explicitly annotated the Foo interface with @Local. From seeing a stack trace in the code I think that it is actually using a remote interface, whereas I want all of my beans to be local. Do I need to explicitly annotate interfaces as Local or is there some default? Finding documentation on this is proving challenging so any links to relevant documentation would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • DBTransactions between stateless calls using GUIDs

    - by Marty Trenouth
    I'm looking to add transactional support to my DB engine and providing to Abstract Transaction Handling down to passing in Guids with the DB Action Command. The DB engine would run similar to: private static Database DB; public static Dictionary<Guid,DBTransaction> Transactions = new ...() public static void DoDBAction(string cmdstring,List<Parameter> parameters,Guid TransactionGuid) { DBCommand cmd = BuildCommand(cmdstring,parameters); if(Transactions.ContainsKey(TransactionGuid)) cmd.Transaction = Transactions[TransactionGuid]; DB.ExecuteScalar(cmd); } public static BuildCommand(string cmd, List<Parameter> parameters) { // Create DB command from EntLib Database and assign parameters } public static Guid BeginTransaction() { // creates new Transaction adding it to "Transactions" and opens a new connection } public static Guid Commit(Guid g) { // Commits Transaction and removes it from "Transactions" and closes connection } public static Guid Rollback(Guid g) { // Rolls back Transaction and removes it from "Transactions" and closes connection } The Calling system would run similar to: Guid g try { g = DBEngine.BeginTransaction() DBEngine.DoDBAction(cmdstring1, parameters,g) // do some other stuff DBEngine.DoDBAction(cmdstring2, parameters2,g) // sit here and wait for a response from other item DBEngine.DoDBAction(cmdstring3, parameters3,g) DBEngine.Commit(g) } catch(Exception){ DBEngine.Rollback(g);} Does this interfere with .NET connection pooling (other than a connection be accidently left open)? Will EntLib keep the connection open until the commit or rollback?

    Read the article

  • Netbean6.8: Cant deploy an webapp with Message Driven Bean

    - by Harry Pham
    I create an Enterprise Application CustomerApp that also generated two projects CustomerApp-ejb and CustomerApp-war. In the CustomerApp-ejb, I create a SessionBean call CustomerSessionBean.java as below. package com.customerapp.ejb; import javax.ejb.Stateless; import javax.ejb.LocalBean; import javax.persistence.EntityManager; import javax.persistence.PersistenceContext; @Stateless @LocalBean public class CustomerSessionBean { @PersistenceContext(unitName = "CustomerApp-ejbPU") private EntityManager em; public void persist(Object object) { em.persist(object); } } Now I can deploy CustomerApp-war just fine. But as soon as I create a Message Driven Bean, I cant deploy CustomerApp-war anymore. When I create NotificationBean.java (message driven bean), In the project destination option, I click add, and have NotificationQueue for the Destination Name and Destination Type is Queue. Below are the code package com.customerapp.mdb; import javax.ejb.ActivationConfigProperty; import javax.ejb.MessageDriven; import javax.jms.Message; import javax.jms.MessageListener; @MessageDriven(mappedName = "jms/NotificationQueue", activationConfig = { @ActivationConfigProperty(propertyName = "acknowledgeMode", propertyValue = "Auto-acknowledge"), @ActivationConfigProperty(propertyName = "destinationType", propertyValue = "javax.jms.Queue") }) public class NotificationBean implements MessageListener { public NotificationBean() { } public void onMessage(Message message) { } } If I remove the @MessageDriven annotation, then I can deploy the project. Any idea why and how to fix it?

    Read the article

  • Netbean6.8: Cant deploy an app if I have Message Driven Bean

    - by Harry Pham
    I create an Enterprise Application CustomerApp that also generated two projects CustomerApp-ejb and CustomerApp-war. In the CustomerApp-ejb, I create a SessionBean call CustomerSessionBean.java as below. package com.customerapp.ejb; import javax.ejb.Stateless; import javax.ejb.LocalBean; import javax.persistence.EntityManager; import javax.persistence.PersistenceContext; @Stateless @LocalBean public class CustomerSessionBean { @PersistenceContext(unitName = "CustomerApp-ejbPU") private EntityManager em; public void persist(Object object) { em.persist(object); } } Now I can deploy CustomerApp-war just fine. But as soon as I create a Message Driven Bean, I cant deploy CustomerApp-war anymore. When I create NotificationBean.java (message driven bean), In the project destination option, I click add, and have NotificationQueue for the Destination Name and Destination Type is Queue. Below are the code package com.customerapp.mdb; import javax.ejb.ActivationConfigProperty; import javax.ejb.MessageDriven; import javax.jms.Message; import javax.jms.MessageListener; @MessageDriven(mappedName = "jms/NotificationQueue", activationConfig = { @ActivationConfigProperty(propertyName = "acknowledgeMode", propertyValue = "Auto-acknowledge"), @ActivationConfigProperty(propertyName = "destinationType", propertyValue = "javax.jms.Queue") }) public class NotificationBean implements MessageListener { public NotificationBean() { } public void onMessage(Message message) { } } If I remove the @MessageDriven annotation, then I can deploy the project. Any idea why and how to fix it?

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  | Next Page >