Re: [sca-bindings] ISSUE 5: JMS bindingType and atLeastOne intentoverlaps with setting JMSDeliveryMode

[Eric Johnson <eric@tibco.com>]

Peshev, Peter wrote:
> fullfiling the action item : "create a proposal for BINDINGS-5 based on
> Mike Rs proposal. " 
>
>
> Proposal :
> The following text should be included after line 217 (numbering is
> according sca-jmsbinding-draft-20070925)
>   
Absent PDF files that match for all the salient details on all
platforms, I'd prefer that we all use better locators than line
numbering. On my copy of Linux, using OpenOffice 2.3, line 217 is in the
middle of XML Schema text.

(And again request that the editors get us an updated version of the
specs in PDF format).

Thanks.

-Eric.
> Deployers/assemblers may configure NON_PERSISTENT for JMSDeliveryMode in
> order to provide higher performance with a decreased quality of service.
> If such configuration is done in binding.jms than the delivery policies
> "atLeastOnce" and "exactlyOnce" can not be fulfilled if they are as well
> configured. The SCA Runtime MUST generate an error for such invalid
> combination at deployment time.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Rowley [mailto:mrowley@bea.com] 
> Sent: Monday, 8. October 2007 18:22
> To: sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [sca-bindings] ISSUE 5: JMS bindingType and atLeastOne
> intent overlaps with setting JMSDeliveryMode
>
>
> I think this is a great issue.
>
> I believe that the spec should say that if there is a conflict between a
> required intent and the semantics associated with a binding
> configuration, then it should be a deployment error.  In the case of the
> JMS specification, specific potential conflicts, such as the one
> described here, should be defined.
>
> Michael
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Johnson [mailto:eric@tibco.com] 
> Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 12:36 PM
> To: sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [sca-bindings] ISSUE 5: JMS bindingType and atLeastOne intent
> overlaps with setting JMSDeliveryMode
>
> Logged as http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-5
>
> Peshev, Peter wrote:
>   
>> TARGET:
>> JMS Binding Specification Version 1.1, Working Draft  25 September
>>     
> 2007
>   
>> DESCRIPTION:
>>
>> The current bindingType of the jms is defined as :
>>
>> <bindingType type="binding.jms" alwaysProvides="jms"
>> mayProvide="atLeastOnce atMostOnce ordered conversation"/>
>>
>> Not being at all policy expert and under the assumption that
>> "mayProvide" is supposed to indicate - ("in some scenarios when the
>> binding is used, this may be  provided, the assembler by supplying
>> intents can influence the runtime behavior of the binding"), here is
>>     
> the
>   
>> question :
>>
>> The semantics of atLeastOnce is actually having persistent messages
>>     
> over
>   
>> a queue, and persistent messages + durable subscriptions over topic. 
>> If that can be configured by intents by the assembler, doesn't it
>> overlap with the setting of JMSDeliveryMode in the schema of the JMS
>> binding ? Which one wins in case of conflict ?
>>
>>
>> PROPOSED SOLUTION
>>  Drop JMSDeliveryMode from the schema
>>
>>
>>
>>   
>>     
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
> at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php 
>
>