So....I'll check this stuff in??
Bill
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of marc
> fleury
> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 9:56 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] No storeEntity before ejbFind<METHOD>
>
>
> |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
>
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
