|Danny O' is right about not trashing the Stateful bean on a
|rollback. I was
|only thinking about Entities when I made that comment(as was probably
|Danch). Actually, the spec infers that a Stateful bean is not registered
|with the TM unless it implements SessionSynchronization.
yes that is the CMT+sync case I was refering to, the BMT case is even more
clear cut imho...
time to commit (without that part, I need to refresh on the spec)
marcf
|
|Regards,
|Bill
|
|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of marc
|> fleury
|> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 4:52 PM
|> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] remove transactional
|>
|>
|> so
|>
|> <fifteen minute time lapse>
|>
|> is the create the same? cannot be transactional??? or just remove?
|>
|> having problems with the new code as we speak
|>
|> marcf
|>
|> |-----Original Message-----
|> |From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> |[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of marc
|> |fleury
|> |Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 4:26 PM
|> |To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> |Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] remove transactional
|> |
|> |
|> |chill pill bill...
|> |
|> |there is more fire coming, although when we volley back and
|> forth like this
|> |you must account for delivery lag,
|> |
|> |so everyone take a "chill pill bill" for 15 mins, when you come
|> back we are
|> |all synchronized :)
|> |
|> |ready ? so where are we, the requirements seems contradictorial
|> at least to
|> |me (but I didnt' take the chill pill and I want to finish the commits)
|> |
|> |marcf
|> |
|> ||-----Original Message-----
|> ||From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> ||[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bill
|> ||Burke
|> ||Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 4:09 PM
|> ||To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> ||Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] remove transactional
|> ||
|> ||
|> ||Just in case you didn't see the last email,
|> ||
|> ||statefulbean.remove() results in an exception when the bean is
|> ||participating
|> ||within a transaction. This is not allowed. Please see the spec!
|> ||
|> ||Bill
|> ||
|> ||> -----Original Message-----
|> ||> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> ||> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
|> Behalf Of marc
|> ||> fleury
|> ||> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 3:54 PM
|> ||> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> ||> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] remove transactional
|> ||>
|> ||>
|> ||> fair enough, by popular demand
|> ||>
|> ||> remove() is not a transactional operation then,
|> ||>
|> ||> you call it? the stateful bean is gone, gone I tell you!
|> ||>
|> ||> marcf
|> ||>
|> ||> |-----Original Message-----
|> ||> |From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> ||> |[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
|> |Behalf Of danch
|> ||> |(Dan Christopherson)
|> ||> |Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 3:35 PM
|> ||> |To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> ||> |Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] remove transactional
|> ||> |
|> ||> |
|> ||> |I agree with Bill - removing everything involved in the rolled-back
|> ||> |transaction from the cache is a must.
|> ||> |
|> ||> |-danch
|> ||> |
|> ||> |Bill Burke wrote:
|> ||> |
|> ||> |> Nope, with the old code, B would be removed from the cache when
|> ||> |b.remove()
|> ||> |> was called even if it was invoked from within a transaction.
|> ||Also, all
|> ||> |> beans involved with a transaction would be removed from the
|> |cache on a
|> ||> |> rollback within InstanceSynchronization.
|> ||> |>
|> ||> |> I think that is the safe and correct approach to remove any
|> ||> bean from the
|> ||> |> cache that is part of a rollback. Otherwise you may have
|> ||> corrupted data.
|> ||> |>
|> ||> |> Bill
|> ||> |>
|> ||> |>
|> ||> |>>-----Original Message-----
|> ||> |>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> ||> |>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
|> ||Behalf Of marc
|> ||> |>>fleury
|> ||> |>>Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 2:57 PM
|> ||> |>>To: Jboss-Development@Lists. Sourceforge. Net
|> ||> |>>Subject: [JBoss-dev] remove transactional
|> ||> |>>
|> ||> |>>
|> ||> |>>as I wrap up the stuff, sanity check
|> ||> |>>
|> ||> |>>bean a and bean b
|> ||> |>>
|> ||> |>>a starts transaction and calls b.remove() and then rolls back
|> ||> |>>
|> ||> |>>b is still there in cache right?
|> ||> |>>
|> ||> |>>marcf
|> ||> |>>
|> ||> |>>_________________
|> ||> |>>Marc Fleury, Ph.D
|> ||> |>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> ||> |>>_________________
|> ||> |
|> ||> |
|> ||> |
|> ||> |_______________________________________________
|> ||> |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
|>
|
|
|
|_______________________________________________
|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
