This one time, at band camp, Brian McCallister said: BM>Current solution is just to provide a "Transaction" interface with BM>implementations built from the various persistence repositories (which BM>know what they are using) in the application. Distributed transactions BM>(two step) aren't needed thankfully. BM> BM>The "Transaction" namespace pollution is getting so annoying that I BM>just want to provide JTA because every persistence backend we support BM>knows how to handle JTA nicely if it is provided to it. BM> BM>-Brian BM> BM>On Wednesday, November 12, 2003, at 04:01 PM, Brian McCallister wrote: BM> BM>> I need to transparently wrap whether I am using JTA, OJB local BM>> transactions, ODMG transactions implemented as a wrapper around OJB BM>> local transactions (the most common case), Hibernate local BM>> transactions, or JDBC local transactions. BM>> BM>> As both OJB and Hibernate can wrap JTA, and JTA can wrap JDBC, it BM>> seems the easiest way to provide the greatest functionality is to find BM>> a convenient way to provide a JTA implementation around local BM>> transactions then simply expose JTA to my users =) BM>> BM>> -Brian BM>> BM>> On Wednesday, November 12, 2003, at 03:27 PM, Chris Perrin wrote: BM>> BM>>> Do you need JTA or just transaction support? BM>>> ----- Original Message ----- BM>>> From: "Brian McCallister" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> BM>>> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> BM>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 2:23 PM BM>>> Subject: [OT] Non-EJB container JTA BM>>> BM>>> BM>>>> Sorry for the off-topic posting, but with the collective expertise BM>>>> here... BM>>>> BM>>>> Anyone know of a free/open JTA implementation that is not bound to an BM>>>> EJB container?
AFAIK, there are only two avaible. Tyrex (http://tyrex.sf.net/) or, even better, JOTM (http://jotm.objectweb.org/). Bruce -- perl -e 'print unpack("u30","<0G)[EMAIL PROTECTED]&5R\"F9E<G)E=\$\!F<FEI+F-O;0\`\`");' The Castor Project http://www.castor.org/ Apache Geronimo http://incubator.apache.org/projects/geronimo.html
