Sorry it took a little longer. I have now committed my changes.
In fact I removed the check in the BeanProcessor and do it now inside
the interceptor.
Apart from that I worked on making the jpa code compatible to aries
transaction and making blueprint-jpa independent of jta.
The reason for this is that JTA can be used independently from jpa so it
makes sense to not mix both. For example we should be able to run JMS
and JPA in the same transaction. This would not work if we tie
transactions too much to jpa.
While trying to integrate with aries transaction blueprint I found some
problems:
- annotation based transactions are implemented but do not work. I think
this is a bug in aries. The beanprocessor does not seem to be active.
- The aries @Transaction annotation is defined in a very unfortunate
way. It only applies to methods. In many cases you would simply want to
annotate a class with it.
Unfortunately I defined the copied transactions differently so they also
applied to classes. So there was a conflict between the two. I now
completely removed the transaction annotation from the jpa-experiments
code. If we want to use annotation based transactions we will have to
use different annotations anyway. I deferred this part for now.
Apart from that the xml declared transactions from aries transaction
blueprint now work nicely together with the new blueprint-jpa module.
The example is defined this way now.
For the closure based example I introduced a new TransactionType enum to
avoid using the aries one.
So both examples should now work again.
I also found that I forgot to implement the @PersistenceUnit support.
This is one possible next enhancement.
For transaction support I wonder if we can reuse aries transaction
blueprint. I am not sure to be honest. It is tailored a lot towards xml
based annotations with * based filters and such. I would be in favour of
dropping xml support completely for jpa and transactions and only have
annotations in the new code. Not sure if the community agrees though.
Christian
On 08.04.2015 22:24, Giuseppe Gerla wrote:
Yes, I verified that the problem is that the TxBeanProcessor check the
transaction type in the following code
Interceptor interceptor = (getTransactionType(supplierProxy) ==
PersistenceUnitTransactionType.JTA) ?
new XaTxInterceptorImpl(tm, supplierProxy) : new
ResourceLocalTransactionalInterceptor(supplierProxy);
cdr.registerInterceptorWithComponent(beanData, interceptor);
Did you remove this part?
--
Christian Schneider
http://www.liquid-reality.de
Open Source Architect
http://www.talend.com
