[jboss-user] [EJB/JBoss] - Re: EJB2.1:UserTransaction with CMT- possible bug?

2007-05-22 Thread mskonda
anonymous wrote : The execution of a method of an enterprise bean with container-managed transaction demarcation | for which the value of the transaction attribute is NOT_SUPPORTED, NEVER, or SUPPORTS. However Wayne, I am able to use UT from a REQUIRED method too, which I think the above

[jboss-user] [EJB/JBoss] - Re: EJB2.1:UserTransaction with CMT- possible bug?

2007-05-21 Thread waynebaylor
Why the call to tm.suspend()? By marking the method with TransactionAttributeType.NEVER you're stating that there will not be a transaction in progress when the method is called. Maybe try using TransactionAttributeType.NOT_SUPPORTED instead of NEVER. That way, if the caller has an

[jboss-user] [EJB/JBoss] - Re: EJB2.1:UserTransaction with CMT- possible bug?

2007-05-21 Thread mskonda
Thanks for your answer Wayne. Irrespective of the attrubute type, the use of UT is prohibited. So my point is - the use of UT in CMT is not allowed according to EJB Spec but looks like we have a way to get around this restriction (if I am not missing something obvious :) ) Whenever my method

[jboss-user] [EJB/JBoss] - Re: EJB2.1:UserTransaction with CMT- possible bug?

2007-05-21 Thread waynebaylor
I just checked out the EJB3 Spec and found the following: Section 13.6.5 Handling of Methods that Run with an unspecified transaction context anonymous wrote : | The term ?an unspecified transaction context? is used in the EJB specification to refer to the cases in | which the EJB