caching local objects

[Raj Joe]

I am caching ejb local objects (stateless session beans)in the service locator in the class level static hashmap variable.

So I have a hashmap(cache of local objects) in one JVM
Will there be any impact of this caching in clustered environment?

I believe that in each server in the cluster there would be a hashmap(cache of local objects).This means that I will have same local object cached in different JVM hashmap.

[David Harkness]

Originally posted by Raj Joe:
This means that I will have same local object cached in different JVM hashmap.

No. Since you are caching references to local EJBs -- meaning they are in the same JVM -- each JVM cache will reference a different set of local EJBs (those in its JVM).

[Raj Joe]

Originally posted by David Harkness:
No. Since you are caching references to local EJBs -- meaning they are in the same JVM -- each JVM cache will reference a different set of local EJBs (those in its JVM).

I am using a singleton (service locator).I am using an hashmap as static class variable to cache all remote/local objects.

In clustered environment I will end up having one service locator per JVM.
Even the static hashmap which hold references will be one per JVM.

My concern is even though a reference may be available in one JVM cache,because of clustering the request may go to other JVM and create a new reference in cache in that JVM.

Is there any impact of caching remote/local references in this way wrt to clustered environment

[ October 27, 2004: Message edited by: Raj Joe ]
[ October 27, 2004: Message edited by: Raj Joe ]

[nilesh Katakkar]

As long as you are caching EJBLocalHome / RemoteHome reference you should be fine. Actual implementation of Home interface is implemented as single ton by most of the app servers. Each JVM will maintain reference to EJB<Local/Remote>Home Ojbect available on that box.
Clustering should not matter.

I hope you are trying to store reference to EJBLocalObject / EJBObject. Won't make sense to do so.