On Jul 24, 2006, at 12:59 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
One of the biggest problem with using the OpenEJB 2 containers in 3
is the extensive use of Geronimo's TransactionContextManager class
to track transaction related data and to demarc transaction
boundaries.
Exactly how is this a problem?
I have just committed the necessary changes to remove this
dependency. We are now managing our own transaction data in the
EjbTransactionContext object (note this is different from the 1
TransactionContext class), and transaction demarcation is handled
by directly manipulating the transaction manager.
Maybe you could describe this a bit more. From this I'd guess you
have moved any services provided by the geronimo transaction context
into openejb. Since some of these were used by the connector
framework I'm wondering how you expect openejb to work with the
geronimo connector framework with this essential functionality
missing. Are you planning to rewrite the geronimo connector stuff in
openejb and have geronimo use it for web containers?
The idea behind the transaction context was to provide a central
location to manage all the data associated with a transaction, and to
make it flexible enough to use with any container. Are you saying
that you think this is a bad idea? What design do you propose
instead? In particular, what is supposed to happen when a servlet
starts a user tx and calls an ejb?
thanks
david jencks
I'd like to drop the transaction policy code from the 2 tree
entierly and simply convert the 1 transaction code to an
javax.interceptor.Interceptor implementation, but that is for
another thread.
Anyways, we are one big step closer merged the 1 and 2 code bases :)
-dain
