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: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] @Transactional
Date Tue, 10 Jul 2012 16:21:30 GMT
Hi Romain,

Nothing for the 0.3 release. But we discussed some EntityManager configuration options that
we may add later.
So for 0.3 I am fine with tx-api and jpa-impl

Cheers,
Arne

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com] 
Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. Juli 2012 09:06
An: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] @Transactional

What will you put in jpa api today?
Le 10 juil. 2012 08:43, "Arne Limburg" <arne.limburg@openknowledge.de> a écrit :

> 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