deltaspike-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petra...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] @Transactional
Date Mon, 30 Jul 2012 11:52:20 GMT
based on the new information provided by pete: +1 to keep it as it is (at
least for v0.3).
(we could think about separated packages before we release v1).

regards,
gerhard



2012/7/30 Pete Muir <pmuir@redhat.com>

> I was talking with Gerhard on IRC, and in Seam 3, we split persistence and
> transactions for the reason that some people want to use transactions
> without persistence.
>
> I personally don't think it's necessary, and we should stick with one
> module.
>
> On 30 Jul 2012, at 12:20, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>
> > Since we currently have not a gain splitting both (people bringing jpa
> > btings jta i think or the opposite *in real life*) we can keep a single
> > module IMO
> >
> > - Romain
> > Le 30 juil. 2012 13:01, "Pete Muir" <pmuir@redhat.com> a écrit :
> >
> >> Do we want to split out transactions from persistence? IMO it's best to
> >> keep the two together:
> >>
> >> * deltaspike-persistence-api
> >> * deltaspike-persistence-impl
> >> * deltaspike-persistence-tx-impl
> >>
> >> I think most people naturally associate persistence with transactions.
> >>
> >> On 30 Jul 2012, at 11:58, Mark Struberg wrote:
> >>
> >>> ack, the main question is which parts are depending on each other.
> >> Having an answer to that question will also determine the name.
> >>>
> >>> jpa-api: con: it might also be used for JTA which is not only for JPA
> >> but also for other TX connectors like JMS.
> >>>
> >>> jta-api: also not good, as JPA can be used without JTA
> (resource-local).
> >> This is actually the main use case.
> >>>
> >>> What about:
> >>> * deltaspike-transaction-api
> >>>
> >>> * deltaspike-transaction-impl (containing resource-local stuff)
> >>> * deltaspike-transaction-tx-impl (containing the tx support, replacing
> >> the transaction strategy)
> >>>
> >>> something along that?
> >>>
> >>> LieGrue,
> >>> strub
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>> From: Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com>
> >>>> To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>>> Cc:
> >>>> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 12:03 PM
> >>>> Subject: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175]
> >> [DELTASPIKE-219] @Transactional
> >>>>
> >>>> hi @ all,
> >>>>
> >>>> we need an agreement about the module name (and if multiple modules
> are
> >>>> needed).
> >>>> it would be useful to do it before v0.3 (which should get released
> >> asap).
> >>>>
> >>>> regards,
> >>>> gerhard
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 2012/7/10 Arne Limburg <arne.limburg@openknowledge.de>
> >>>>
> >>>>> 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
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message