deltaspike-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Arne Limburg <arne.limb...@openknowledge.de>
Subject AW: AW: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] @Transactional
Date Tue, 10 Jul 2012 06:45:55 GMT
I think at least we will end up with a jpa-api
And the tx-impl maybe will contain the JTA stuff?

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Mark Struberg [mailto:struberg@yahoo.de] 
Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. Juli 2012 08:39
An: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] @Transactional

> for renaming PersistenceStrategy to TransactionStrategy

+1


> +1 for renaming deltaspike-jpa-module-api to deltaspike-tx-module-api 
> +and
> creating empty deltaspike-jpa-module-api and deltaspike-tx-module-impl

Not sure, think we need to think a bit harder about what we will finally end up with. 
Will we have a api which has any EE dependency finally? If not it might be enough to have
tx-api + jpa-impl + jta-impl

LieGrue,
strub


----- Original Message -----
> From: Arne Limburg <arne.limburg@openknowledge.de>
> To: "deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org" 
> <deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org>
> Cc: 
> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 8:36 AM
> Subject: AW: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] 
> @Transactional
> 
> What do the others think about doing this already in 0.3?
> +1 from me for renaming PersistenceStrategy to TransactionStrategy
> +1 for renaming deltaspike-jpa-module-api to deltaspike-tx-module-api 
> +and
> creating empty deltaspike-jpa-module-api and deltaspike-tx-module-impl
> 
> Cheers,
> Arne
> 
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Montag, 9. Juli 2012 21:33
> An: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] 
> @Transactional
> 
> +1 for the last
> 
> - Romain
> 
> 
> 2012/7/9 Arne Limburg <arne.limburg@openknowledge.de>
> 
>>  Ihmo we should rename the api to deltaspike-tx-module-api and rename  
>> the PersistenceStrategy to TransactionStrategy Also it looks strange,  
>> the name of the impl should be left as it is. Maybe we should add an  
>> empty impl to the tx-module and an empty api to the JPA module?
>> 
>>  Cheers,
>>  Arne
>> 
>>  -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>  Von: Jason Porter [mailto:lightguard.jp@gmail.com]
>>  Gesendet: Montag, 9. Juli 2012 18:54
>>  An: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>  Betreff: Re: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219]  
>> @Transactional
>> 
>>  I'm fine renaming things for v0.3 as we really haven't done any JPA
> 
>>  related stuff yet.
>> 
>>  On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Gerhard Petracek <  
>> gerhard.petracek@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>  > @ mark:
>>  > that's more or less what we discussed at [1].
>>  >
>>  > regards,
>>  > gerhard
>>  >
>>  > [1] http://s.apache.org/3pO
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > 2012/7/9 Arne Limburg <arne.limburg@openknowledge.de>  >  > >
For 
>> api it's fine,  > > and then we have two impl modules, JPA and JTA?
>>  > >
>>  > > Cheers,
>>  > > Arne
>>  > >
>>  > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----  > > Von: Romain Manni-Bucau

>> [mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com]  > > Gesendet: Sonntag, 8. Juli 2012 
>> 21:37  > > An: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org; Mark Struberg  > 
>> > Betreff: Re: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219]  > 
>> > @Transactional  > >  > > sounds fine  > >  > > - Romain
 > >  > >  
>> > > 2012/7/8 Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>  > >  > >
> maybe we 
>> should just rename the jpa module to tx?
>>  > > >
>>  > > > There is no single import of any javax.persistence in  > >
> 
>> deltaspike-jpa-api yet.
>>  > > >
>>  > > > LieGrue,
>>  > > > strub
>>  > > >
>>  > > >
>>  > > >
>>  > > > ----- Original Message -----
>>  > > > > From: Arne Limburg
> <arne.limburg@openknowledge.de>
>>  > > > > To: "deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org" 
> <
>>  > > > deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org>
>>  > > > > Cc:
>>  > > > > Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 8:39 PM  > > > > Subject:
AW: AW: 
>> [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175]
> [DELTASPIKE-219]
>>  > > > @Transactional
>>  > > > >
>>  > > > > Yes, sounds good.
>>  > > > > The impl of that module could contain the JTA stuff. 
> And the
>>  > > > > JPA module
>>  > > > would
>>  > > > > contain the resource local stuff. Everybody that does
> not need
>>  > > > > the JTA
>>  > > > then
>>  > > > > could just use the tx-api and the JPA api and impl.
>>  > > > >
>>  > > > > Cheers,
>>  > > > > Arne
>>  > > > >
>>  > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----  > > > > Von:
Romain 
>> Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com]  > > > > Gesendet: 
>> Sonntag, 8. Juli 2012 20:29  > > > > An: 
>> deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>  > > > > Betreff: Re: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175]
> [DELTASPIKE-219]
>>  > > > @Transactional
>>  > > > >
>>  > > > > i thought the same, JTA shouldn't depend on JPA. 
>>  > > > > @Transactional should
>>  > > > be in
>>  > > > > a tx module then JPA could use it.
>>  > > > >
>>  > > > > wdyt?
>>  > > > >
>>  > > > > - Romain
>>  > > > >
>>  > > > >
>>  > > > > 2012/7/8 Arne Limburg
> <arne.limburg@openknowledge.de>
>>  > > > >
>>  > > > >>  OK, but I am still not sure where to split it. 
> While
>>  > > > >> implementing this, I got the feeling, that the
> @Transactional
>>  > > > >> stuff should completely move out of the JPA module. 
> It feeled
>>  > > > >> quite strange that the JTA module depends on the
> JPA module...
>>  > > > >>
>>  > > > >>  I think, I'll push my stuff right after the
> 0.3 release and
>>  > > > >> than we  can discuss this at the code-base.
>>  > > > >>  Maybe I should put all into the JPA module and we
> split it
>>  > > > >> after agreeing to a module structure?
>>  > > > >>
>>  > > > >>  Cheers,
>>  > > > >>  Arne
>>  > > > >>
>>  > > > >>  -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----  > > > >> 
Von: Romain 
>> Manni-Bucau
> [mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com]
>>  > > > >>  Gesendet: Sonntag, 8. Juli 2012 17:48  > > >
>>  An: 
>> deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org; Mark
> Struberg
>>  > > > >>  Betreff: Re: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175]
> [DELTASPIKE-219]
>>  > > > >> @Transactional
>>  > > > >>
>>  > > > >>  +1
>>  > > > >>
>>  > > > >>  - Romain
>>  > > > >>
>>  > > > >>
>>  > > > >>  2012/7/8 Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>  >
> > >>  > > 
>> > >>  > +1 for JTA module.
>>  > > > >>  >
>>  > > > >>  > LieGrue,
>>  > > > >>  > strub
>>  > > > >>  >
>>  > > > >>  >
>>  > > > >>  >
>>  > > > >>  > ----- Original Message -----  > > From: 
> Arne Limburg
>>  > > > >> <arne.limburg@openknowledge.de>  > >
> To:
>>  > > > >> "deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org" 
> <  >
>>  > > > >> deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org>
>>  > > > >>  > > Cc:
>>  > > > >>  > > Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 5:47 PM  >
>>  Subject: AW:
>>  > > > >> [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219]  >
>> 
>>  > > > >> @Transactional
>>  > > > >> > >  > > Hi,
>>  > > > >> > > I startet implementing it that way, but I
> stumbled over
>>  > > > >> > > another
>>  > > > > issue:
>>  > > > >>  > > We get a dependency to the JTA spec and
> the EJB spec
>>  > > > >> that
>>  way.
>>  > > > >> So
>>  > > > >
>>  > > > >>  > > our
>>  > > > >>  > JPA module
>>  > > > >>  > > only would work with this apis in the
> classpath.
>>  > > > >>  > > Do we accept this or are we back on a
> JTA module?
>>  > > > >>  > >
>>  > > > >>  > > Cheers,
>>  > > > >>  > > Arne
>>  > > > >>  > >
>>  > > > >>  > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----  >
>>  Von: Romain
>>  > > > >> Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com]  >
>>  Gesendet:
>>  > > > >> Donnerstag, 5. Juli
>>  > > > >> 2012 15:07  > > An: 
> deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>  > > > >>  > > Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175]
> [DELTASPIKE-219]
>>  > > > >> > > @Transactional  > >  > > if
> it works fine with CMT +1  >
>>  > > > >> > > > well let's have a try, we'll
> fix it if it is not enough
>>  > > > > ;)
>>  > > > >>  > >
>>  > > > >>  > > - Romain
>>  > > > >>  > >
>>  > > > >>  > >
>>  > > > >>  > > 2012/7/5 Pete Muir
> <pmuir@redhat.com>  > >  > >>  In
>>  > > > >> Seam
>>  > > > >> 2
>>  > > > >> we:
>>  > > > >>  > >>
>>  > > > >>  > >>  * checked if UT was available in
> JNDI, and used it if
>>  > > > >> it
>>  > > > > were
>>  > > > >>  > >>  * checked if there was a CMT
> transaction, and used it
>>  > > > >> (IIRC
>>  > > > > this
>>  > > > >>  > >> wwas  to work around abug)  >
>>>   * otherwise tried to
>>  > > > >> use a resource local transaction (e.g.
>>  > > > > from
>>  > > > >>  > >>  Hibernate)
>>  > > > >>  > >>  * allowed the user to override and
> specify one
>>  > > > >> strategy
>>  > > > >> >
>>  > > > >> >>  > >>  In Seam 3 we did the same.
>>  > > > >>  > >>
>>  > > > >>  > >>  So I like option 1.
>>  > > > >>  > >>
>>  > > > >>  > >>  On 5 Jul 2012, at 10:03, Arne
> Limburg wrote:
>>  > > > >>  > >>
>>  > > > >>  > >>  > Hi,
>>  > > > >>  > >>  >
>>  > > > >>  > >>  > yesterday I startet working on
> the JTA support for
>>  > > > > @Transactional.
>>  > > > >>  > >>  > My current approach is to
> implement a
>>  > > > > JtaPersistenceStrategy.
>>  > > > >>  > >>  > However that leads me to the
> problem: Who decides
>>  > > > >> which
>>  > > > >
>>  > > > >>  > >> PersistenceStrategy should be taken
> and how should this
>>  > > > > decision
>>  > > > >>  > >> be
>>  > > > >>  > made?
>>  > > > >>  > >>  > I have three suggestions:
>>  > > > >>  > >>  >
>>  > > > >>  > >>  > 1.      We detect, if a
> UserTransaction is available,
>>  > > > > if so, the
>>  > > > >>  > >>  JtaPersistenceStrategy is taken,
> otherwise the  > >>
>>  > > > >> ResourceLocalPersistenceStrategy is taken.
>>  > > > >>  > >>  >
>>  > > > >>  > >>  > 2.      We detect, if the
> involved persistence units
>>  > > > > use JTA or
>>  > > > >>  > >>  RESOURCE_LOCAL (which would lead to
> another question:
>>  > > > >> Would
>>  > > > > we
>>  > > > >>  > >> like to  support, that
> @Transactional mixes both
>>  > > > >> strategies?)
>>  > > > > and
>>  > > > >>  > >> decide from  that information  >  >
> > >>  > >>  > 
>> 3.      We let the user decide
> by making one (or both)
>>  > > > > persistence
>>  > > > >>  > >>  strategies @Alternatives  >
>>>   > What do you think?
>>  > > > >>  > >>  >
>>  > > > >>  > >>  > Cheers,
>>  > > > >>  > >>  > Arne
>>  > > > >>  > >>
>>  > > > >>  > >>
>>  > > > >>  > >
>>  > > > >>  >
>>  > > > >>
>>  > > > >
>>  > > >
>>  > >
>>  >
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  --
>>  Jason Porter
>>  http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com
>>  http://twitter.com/lightguardjp
>> 
>>  Software Engineer
>>  Open Source Advocate
>>  Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling
>> 
>>  PGP key id: 926CCFF5
>>  PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
>> 
> 

Mime
View raw message