directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alex Karasulu" <aok...@bellsouth.net>
Subject Using a ThreadLocal to find a Transaction
Date Fri, 16 Apr 2004 15:39:48 GMT
Hi,


I was just looking at an API I'm implementing where one implementation 
uses JE as the backing store and I was thinking about how I can avoid 
passing through a Transaction object so JE can make use of it.  The 
API can not include the Transaction as an argument in every method 
that operates against the backing store.  My first inclination was to 
use a ThreadLocal which could be checked for the presence of a 
Transaction.  If one is present then it would be supplied to the 
JE operation if one is not present then null would be used.  

Is this a mechanism that could be used with JE API's to avoid having 
to directly specific the transaction each time as an argument?  I know 
you want the API to remain as close to the original BDB API so those 
used to BDB can rock and roll with nominal learning curves but Java 
does offer some neat constructs that obviates the need to explicitly 
specify the Transaction as a method argument every time.

It might be nice not to have to worry about providing the Transaction 
which can be checked for by the JE method itself using the ThreadLocal.
There is nothing stopping me from doing this myself in those classes 
that make the calls to JE but I just thought I'd see if you guys 
thought of it and if so why it's not used.  I'm sure the idea must 
have occurred at some point.


Thanks,
Alex




Mime
View raw message