Andreas, I think I was not clear with my requirement. Consider a scenario like this. Assume we use synapse and say we pick a message from a database and send it to a JMS queue, using the JMS transport. Now I want this happen to be happened in a distributed transaction, i.e. if something went wrong (database crash or JMS queue crash) I want to rollback the transaction so that I don't loose any messages.
Rajika On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Andreas Veithen <[email protected]>wrote: > Rajika, > > In that case, why do you need a distributed transaction, considering > that the JMS sender uses a single resource (the JMS connection > factory) and executes a single operation (sending the JMS message)? It > seems to me that in that case, you don't need a transaction, and even > less a distributed transaction. > > Andreas > > On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 11:33, Rajika Kumarasiri <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Andreas Veithen > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > >> Rajika, > >> > >> Why would the JMS sender ever want to create a new transaction? > >> > > > > In case of only the JMS TransportSender needs to participate in a > > distributed transaction. > > > > Rajika > > > > > >> > >> Andreas > >> > >> > > >
