|I'll answer the below question again....I added no logic "for when the real
|transaction commits" except for disassociating the entity bean with the
|transaction within InstanceSynchronization.afterCompletion.
|beforeCompletion should do the dirty flag magic....
|
|Did I answer the question?
yeah... if a user defines isModified and "tunedUpdates" then we don't pay
the price twice.
if the user doesn't specify any then we do pay the price twice, once at
storage time during the find and once at transaction commit time.
regards
marcf
|
|Bill
|
|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of marc
|> fleury
|> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 6:13 PM
|> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] No storeEntity before ejbFind<METHOD>
|>
|>
|> hmmmm
|>
|> for example when the real transaction commits, what do you do? do you
|> re-store the stuff? or do you correctly keep track of who is
|> updated through
|> setting the dirty flag?
|>
|> This is good stuff ...
|>
|> marcf
|> ____________________________________
|> "but I think you are moving to fast"
|> -- Some popular rap song --
|> ____________________________________
|>
|>
|>
|> |-----Original Message-----
|> |From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> |[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bill
|> |Burke
|> |Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 5:33 PM
|> |To: Jboss-Development@Lists. Sourceforge. Net
|> |Subject: [JBoss-dev] No storeEntity before ejbFind<METHOD>
|> |
|> |
|> |The EJB spec 2.0 reads.... 9.6.4
|> |
|> |"Before invoking the ejbFind<METHOD>(...) method, the container
|> must first
|> |synchronize the state of any entity bean instances that are
|> |participating in
|> |the same transaction context as is used to execute the
|> ejbFind<METHOD>(...)
|> |by invoking the ejbStore() method on those entity bean instances."
|> |
|> |JBoss is not doing this.
|> |
|> |We really needed this change, so I implemented it. Let me know
|> if you want
|> |me to commit it. If I get no response in a few days, I'll just
|commit it
|> |anyways...Isn't that the way it works?
|> |
|> |Summary of changes:
|> |
|> |- Created a new class TxEntityMap that maps transactions to the entities
|> |that are associated with that transaction
|> |- Added an instance to TxEntityMap to EntityContainer
|> |- EntitySynchronizationInterceptor.register(...) associates the
|> transaction
|> |with the entity bean into the TxEntityMap
|> |-
|> |EntitySynchronizationInterceptor.InstanceSynchronization.afterCom
|> pletion()
|> |disassociates the entity with the transaction
|> |- Don't worry, I'm pretty sure I clean up everything.
|> |
|> |Bill
|> |
|> |
|> |
|> |_______________________________________________
|> |Jboss-development mailing list
|> |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> |http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
|>
|>
|>
|> _______________________________________________
|> Jboss-development mailing list
|> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
|>
|
|
|
|_______________________________________________
|Jboss-development mailing list
|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
