geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dain Sundstrom <>
Date Sat, 26 Feb 2005 18:02:50 GMT
On Feb 26, 2005, at 8:18 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:

> From IRC last night
> <dain> djencks: can a Transaction object return status NO_TRANSACTION?
> <djencks> right now, ours do but I believe that is an error
> <djencks> I think after they are complete they should be 
> From the JavaDoc for Transaction.getStatus():
> Returns:
>     The transaction status. If no transaction is associated with the 
> target object, this method returns the Status.NoTransaction value.
> So yes, it definitely can, and code that is using Transaction needs to 
> be able to handle that even if our particular implementation does not 
> allow it.

I guess it depends on how you read that sentence.  I could just as 
easily say, I have a transaction associated with the Transaction object 
and it is committed.  If you were to interpret it that ways, then the 
the only time you would see NO_TRANSACTION would be during object 
construction before the actual physical transaction is created.  
Anyway, maybe we should ask for clarification.

Anyway, it is no skin off my back to add a check for this state, it 
just seems illogical to me.


View raw message