sounds fine - Romain
2012/7/8 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > maybe we should just rename the jpa module to tx? > > There is no single import of any javax.persistence in deltaspike-jpa-api > yet. > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Arne Limburg <[email protected]> > > To: "[email protected]" < > [email protected]> > > Cc: > > Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 8:39 PM > > Subject: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] > @Transactional > > > > Yes, sounds good. > > The impl of that module could contain the JTA stuff. And the JPA module > would > > contain the resource local stuff. Everybody that does not need the JTA > then > > could just use the tx-api and the JPA api and impl. > > > > Cheers, > > Arne > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:[email protected]] > > Gesendet: Sonntag, 8. Juli 2012 20:29 > > An: [email protected] > > Betreff: Re: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] > @Transactional > > > > i thought the same, JTA shouldn't depend on JPA. @Transactional should > be in > > a tx module then JPA could use it. > > > > wdyt? > > > > - Romain > > > > > > 2012/7/8 Arne Limburg <[email protected]> > > > >> OK, but I am still not sure where to split it. While implementing > >> this, I got the feeling, that the @Transactional stuff should > >> completely move out of the JPA module. It feeled quite strange that > >> the JTA module depends on the JPA module... > >> > >> I think, I'll push my stuff right after the 0.3 release and than we > >> can discuss this at the code-base. > >> Maybe I should put all into the JPA module and we split it after > >> agreeing to a module structure? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Arne > >> > >> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > >> Von: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:[email protected]] > >> Gesendet: Sonntag, 8. Juli 2012 17:48 > >> An: [email protected]; Mark Struberg > >> Betreff: Re: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] > >> @Transactional > >> > >> +1 > >> > >> - Romain > >> > >> > >> 2012/7/8 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > >> > >> > +1 for JTA module. > >> > > >> > LieGrue, > >> > strub > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> > > From: Arne Limburg <[email protected]> > >> > > To: "[email protected]" < > >> > [email protected]> > >> > > Cc: > >> > > Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2012 5:47 PM > >> > > Subject: AW: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] > >> > > @Transactional > >> > > > >> > > Hi, > >> > > I startet implementing it that way, but I stumbled over another > > issue: > >> > > We get a dependency to the JTA spec and the EJB spec that way. So > > > >> > > our > >> > JPA module > >> > > only would work with this apis in the classpath. > >> > > Do we accept this or are we back on a JTA module? > >> > > > >> > > Cheers, > >> > > Arne > >> > > > >> > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > >> > > Von: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:[email protected]] > >> > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 5. Juli 2012 15:07 > >> > > An: [email protected] > >> > > Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-175] [DELTASPIKE-219] > >> > > @Transactional > >> > > > >> > > if it works fine with CMT +1 > >> > > > >> > > well let's have a try, we'll fix it if it is not enough > > ;) > >> > > > >> > > - Romain > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > 2012/7/5 Pete Muir <[email protected]> > >> > > > >> > >> In Seam 2 we: > >> > >> > >> > >> * checked if UT was available in JNDI, and used it if it > > were > >> > >> * checked if there was a CMT transaction, and used it (IIRC > > this > >> > >> wwas to work around abug) > >> > >> * otherwise tried to use a resource local transaction (e.g. > > from > >> > >> Hibernate) > >> > >> * allowed the user to override and specify one strategy > >> > >> > >> > >> In Seam 3 we did the same. > >> > >> > >> > >> So I like option 1. > >> > >> > >> > >> On 5 Jul 2012, at 10:03, Arne Limburg wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> > Hi, > >> > >> > > >> > >> > yesterday I startet working on the JTA support for > > @Transactional. > >> > >> > My current approach is to implement a > > JtaPersistenceStrategy. > >> > >> > However that leads me to the problem: Who decides which > > > >> > >> PersistenceStrategy should be taken and how should this > > decision > >> > >> be > >> > made? > >> > >> > I have three suggestions: > >> > >> > > >> > >> > 1. We detect, if a UserTransaction is available, > > if so, the > >> > >> JtaPersistenceStrategy is taken, otherwise the > >> > >> ResourceLocalPersistenceStrategy is taken. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > 2. We detect, if the involved persistence units > > use JTA or > >> > >> RESOURCE_LOCAL (which would lead to another question: Would > > we > >> > >> like to support, that @Transactional mixes both strategies?) > > and > >> > >> decide from that information > > >> > >> > 3. We let the user decide by making one (or both) > > persistence > >> > >> strategies @Alternatives > >> > >> > What do you think? > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Cheers, > >> > >> > Arne > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >
