Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cxf-issues-archive@locus.apache.org Received: (qmail 42988 invoked from network); 26 Sep 2006 05:16:38 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 26 Sep 2006 05:16:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 94194 invoked by uid 500); 26 Sep 2006 05:16:38 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cxf-issues-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 94162 invoked by uid 500); 26 Sep 2006 05:16:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cxf-issues-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list cxf-issues@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 94153 invoked by uid 99); 26 Sep 2006 05:16:38 -0000 Received: from idunn.apache.osuosl.org (HELO idunn.apache.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.84) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 25 Sep 2006 22:16:38 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests= Received: from [209.237.227.198] ([209.237.227.198:36659] helo=brutus.apache.org) by idunn.apache.osuosl.org (ecelerity 2.1.1.8 r(12930)) with ESMTP id 9A/D0-05106-5B7B8154 for ; Mon, 25 Sep 2006 22:16:38 -0700 Received: from brutus (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25B0371428E for ; Tue, 26 Sep 2006 05:12:51 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <26854846.1159247571151.JavaMail.jira@brutus> Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 22:12:51 -0700 (PDT) From: "willem Jiang (JIRA)" To: cxf-issues@incubator.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (CXF-61) Refactor for better transaction support In-Reply-To: <21099273.1157709382406.JavaMail.jira@brutus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-61?page=comments#action_12437734 ] willem Jiang commented on CXF-61: --------------------------------- Here are some points on the JMS Transport stuff: [ulhas] Currently JMS Session pool in Artix uses different Message Receiver acknowledgement mechanism than Celtix to provide Transaction support. (Celtix uses AUTO_ACKNOWLEDGEMENT) whereas Artix uses CLIENT_ACKNOWLEDGE for server side. [Willem] AUTO_ACKNOWLEDGMENT just make sure JMS broker client received the message, but not sure about the client had processed the message. If we want to support the Transaction in CXF, I think we need to change to CLIENT_ACKNOWLEDGE to make sure the message had been processed in message level. [ulhas] Second part of the transaction support is in current JMSServerTransport postDispatch code. This is the place where the server make sure that the message received can be processed and it is safe to send the Acknowledgement to JMS broker to remove the message from topic/queue and commit. [Willem] In current CXF JMS Transport implementation the transport just provide an channel to send and receive messages. All the message handling stuff need to play with the Stream. I think it is a good place in the OutputStream close method to send acknowledgment to JMS broker. So if we want to support local transaction in CXF JMS, we just need change the Session acknowledgment and the OutputStream close method. > Refactor for better transaction support > --------------------------------------- > > Key: CXF-61 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-61 > Project: CeltiXfire > Issue Type: Sub-task > Components: Transports > Reporter: willem Jiang > -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira