Marc and Richard,
I have to agree that some time has passed since I was reading the relevant
specs, but...
JTS. Isn't JTS required in a J2EE implementation? Isn't JTS required to be able
to communicate with other's TM's?
I wouldn't say that writing a completly new TM is "no biggie" when it comes to
distributed 2PC with failure handling and so on.
Regards,
/Tommy
marc fleury wrote:
> Good to see you back at the keyboard... It seems this is where real
> communication happens <g>
>
> Justin Forder wrote:
> > > Well, I had the impression that Rickard was considering putting someone
> > > else's Tx manager back in. He didn't seem to have ruled the Jonas one
> > > out completely, but there was another one he mentioned - perhaps the one
> > > in Enhydra?
> >
> > My thoughts are to make our own. If I made it sound otherwise (I know
> > that Marc mentioned JOnAS) that was not intentional. Any such decision
> > would of course have to be taken by the board, but this is my opinion.
>
> JOnAS was in jboss 1.0, not at all in jboss 2.0 for the reasons laid below
> by Rickard
>
> > Reasons:
> > 1- I'm not at all convinced that a JTS-based tx manager (such as JOnAS)
> > makes sense for a J2EE server. In CORBA perhaps, but not here.
>
> I will agree. From the j2ee point of view the only API we really need to
> confirm is JTA and that is a pretty simple one. The connector spec will
> give us some additional requirements for the TX man but nothing too
> complicated from what I remember. Finally XA is an aberation of legacy,
> there I said it.
>
> So these 3 reasons point towards a "spread your wings" implementation.
> Forget legacy (JTS), go to the web (JTA).
>
> > 2- We have extreme demands on flexibility. The JOnAS tx manager needs to
> > be restructured to fit those needs
>
> Well actually JTS provides a blueprint for the structure of the server. Our
> interceptor based and plugin based architecture places other requirements.
> Since JTS is not real for us, the needs of our architecture come first IMHO.
>
> > 3- The JOnAS code is far from the cleanest I have seen (I know Marc, be
> > nice, be nice, but anyway..)
>
> ;-) well, you know I meant be nice with people ON the list. That being said
> I have respect for Gerard and his crew (and getting drunk together at J1
> made that even stronger) but it is true that their code sometimes is hard to
> follow. And you don't have to be nice all the time, I give you a green
> light to go beat on the apache weenies ;-)
>
> > So to be exact:
> > I do expect that we will have to write a completely new transaction
> > manager for jBoss. No biggie, and will pay off bigtime in the long run
> > :-)
>
> I also believe you have most of it in place Rickard. It just needs work,
> but do you want to start from scratch?
>
> marc
>
> >
>
> > /Rickard
> >
> > --
> > Rickard �berg
> >
> > @home: +46 13 177937
> > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.telkel.com
> > http://www.jboss.org
> > http://www.dreambean.com
> >
> >
