You are so fast :-) 2010/7/15 Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]>
> >>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-1164 > >>>Basically, the callbacks of a singleton are allowed to be transactional > just > >>>like business methods. > > I have added initial patch for this. Could you review? > > > Thanks; > > --Gurkan > > > ________________________________ > From: David Blevins <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thu, July 15, 2010 5:02:43 AM > Subject: Re: EJB 3.1 @Schedule support > > > On Jul 14, 2010, at 6:33 PM, Ivan wrote: > > > Hi, David: > > I am thinking that since the persistent support is not included in the > > web profile, maybe I could try to work on those features belong to EJB > 3.1 > > Lite. Not sure how many features have been covered, hope to get some > > comments from you. > > That sounds like a good idea. We still have some @Singleton work to be > done. > This one in particular: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-1164 > > Basically, the callbacks of a singleton are allowed to be transactional > just > like business methods. > > -David > > > > 2010/7/14 Ivan <[email protected]> > > > >> Hi, David: > >> Finally, I attached the patch for scheduler support to jiar 1168. > >> Please check the comments in that jira, some functions are still in > >> investigation. > >> For the ejb cron trigger, currently, I still use our own, after some > >> updates, it should support all the schedule expression features. About > the > >> persistent support, as you mentioned, it is not of high priority, I will > >> check whether we could take advantage of Quartz. > >> Thanks ! > >> > >> 2010/7/8 David Blevins <[email protected]> > >> > >> > >>> On Jul 7, 2010, at 6:18 PM, Ivan wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi, David: > >>>> Thanks for the info. Currently, most codes for schdule itself are > >>> done. > >>>> Two issues are left : > >>>> a. The first one is for EJBCronTrigger, while trying to use the > >>> existing > >>>> one, I found that it might not implete the all the required cron > >>> functions. > >>>> I also checked the latest Quartz 1.8.3, those two missing functions > are > >>> sill > >>>> not covered. Seems that the only ways now is to continue to working > our > >>> own > >>>> EJBCronTrigger. > >>> > >>> Maybe we should email Quartz and see if they'll implement the missing > >>> functionality. Even if they don't, it might be possible to avoid the > >>> dayOfWeek + dayOfMonth issue if the TCK doesn't test it. It would > still be > >>> broken, but if it can pass the TCK that would buy us a little time to > fix it > >>> more properly after a certified release. Then we could take all the > time we > >>> need to do a more robust impl if we wanted. > >>> > >>>> b. Another thing is for the persistent support, one way is to take > >>>> advantage of quartz, it does have some simliar function, but we might > >>> loss > >>>> the control for it. Another ways is to create our own way to do it, > use > >>> text > >>>> file, db or something else. Any comment for it ? > >>> > >>> I'm not too sure on persistence. Currently we don't really do any > >>> persistence at all. Would probably want to know more about any > potential > >>> Quartz related persistence before commenting more. Not too critical to > >>> solve in the immediate term as @Schedule isn't needed for the Java EE 6 > Web > >>> Profile, but if we can get non-persistent @Schedule support in that > would be > >>> great. We can do the persistent work after the Web Profile completion > if it > >>> looks like it might be hard. > >>> > >>> -David > >>> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> 2010/6/25 David Blevins <[email protected]> > >>>> > >>>>> Hey Ivan, > >>>>> > >>>>> As you're probably noticing already, the @Schedule support was > >>> attempted > >>>>> before. I had basically written most of the deployment part of that > >>> code > >>>>> and someone else was working on a fancy version of the scheduler > itself > >>> -- > >>>>> that's where the real work is anyway. Here was that thread: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/EJB-3-1-Schedule-support-td988002.html > >>>>> > >>>>> This was all before the EJB 3.1 spec closed and things did change > >>> somewhat > >>>>> in the final version, so be on the lookout for old code :) > >>>>> > >>>>> On Oct 31, 2008, at 12:35 PM, David Blevins wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Anyway, I wrapped up ScheduleExpression and TimerConfig into an > >>> object, > >>>>> ScheduleData, and assocted a list of those to a method via a new > >>>>> MethodSchedule object. Then I adjusted DeploymentInfo to return a > list > >>> of > >>>>> MethodSchedule objects. So no need to pass in a method as before. I > >>> had > >>>>> modeled the code after the interceptor binding code where passing in > a > >>>>> method is more convenient than getting all the bindings for all the > >>> methods, > >>>>> but here that obviously doesn't make sense. At least it's more > obvious > >>> once > >>>>> you've pointed it out to me :) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> We should be good to go on the metadata aggregation side. > >>>>> > >>>>> Just updated this code to be more in line with the new MethodContext > >>>>> concept. Basically, the ScheduleData list has been moved right into > >>>>> MethodContext, which should be a little cleaner. The now unneeded > >>>>> MethodSchedule object has been removed > >>>>> > >>>>> Of course, keep in mind since this is half finished, feel free to > >>> change > >>>>> absolutely any part of it in order to achieve the most elegant > result. > >>> At > >>>>> this point it's all just a best guess -- you never really know how > it's > >>>>> going to look till it's done :) > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -David > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Ivan > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Ivan > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Ivan > > -- Ivan
