Ok got, that's because @Tx and@EMC doesn't use same syntax. If both
uses qualifier it would work
Romain Manni-Bucau
Twitter: @rmannibucau
Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
2014-02-20 17:15 GMT+01:00 Thomas Hug <thomas....@gmail.com>:
> Basically that's the case I'm referring to
>
> @Repository
> @EntityManagerConfig( ... )
> public abstract class SimpleRepository extends
> AbstractEntityRepository<Simple, Long> {
>
> @Transactional
> public List<Simple> findByName(String name) {
> String query = "select s from Simple s where s.name = :name";
> return entityManager().createQuery(query, Simple.class)
> .setParameter("name", name)
> .setLockMode(READ) // needs a tx
> .getResultList();
> }
> ...
>
> currently this triggers neither the InvocationHandler nor the interceptor
> (and if it does then the interceptor should deal with @EntityManagerConfig).
>
> Another pragmatic variant could be to add something like that to
> AbstractEntityRepository:
> public abstract V transactional(Callable<V> callable)
> which would then run again in the InvocationHandler, but seems like a
> rather clunky workaround compared to the version above.
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 4:45 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> <rmannibu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> it is since you use the handled (interface for instance) as metadata, no?
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>>
>> 2014-02-20 16:32 GMT+01:00 Thomas Hug <thomas....@gmail.com>:
>> > The more conceptual issue in this concrete case is that @Transactional
>> > isn't really independent from the handler class (namely EntityManager
>> > resolution). But I guess that's something we can deal with.
>> >
>> > So given the release time frame - anything we can do here or shall we
>> park
>> > this case for now?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > <rmannibu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >
>> >> I think so too
>> >>
>> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2014-02-20 13:05 GMT+01:00 Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
>> >:
>> >> > imo we "just" need to support interceptors.
>> >> >
>> >> > regards,
>> >> > gerhard
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > 2014-02-20 12:20 GMT+01:00 Thomas Hug <thomas....@gmail.com>:
>> >> >
>> >> >> While looking at transactional repositories, I realized that
>> >> PartialBeans
>> >> >> invoke concrete methods directly. That doesn't give the invocation
>> >> handler
>> >> >> a chance to hook into the call (and in the data case to control the
>> tx).
>> >> >>
>> >> >> What about creating an additional handler interface which also
>> allows to
>> >> >> pass in the proceeding method? Or is there a better alternative?
>> >> >>
>> >>
>>
