On 4/24/07, Patrick Linskey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Can you ask the websphere team to support a Callable also, so
> we can easily return a value or throw an exception from the
> task?

Seems like for WAS's needs, just supporting Callable would be good
enough, no?


Unfortunately, I am just the messenger in this case.  The  WebSphere
Transactions team has already designed and developed this Runnable solution
and has made it available via a FixPack.  So, it's "cast in concrete"
now...  :-)

Kevin

We need to use Runnable at the end of the day in ManagedRuntime, so that
things compile on 1.4.

-Patrick

--
Patrick Linskey
BEA Systems, Inc.
_______________________________________________________________________
Notice:  This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
information  of  BEA Systems,  Inc.,  its subsidiaries  and  affiliated
entities,  that may be confidential,  proprietary,  copyrighted  and/or
legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
and have received this message in error, please immediately return this
by email and then delete it.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dain Sundstrom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 3:29 PM
> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Possible problem with ddl with only a
> jta-datasource and sequences
>
> On Apr 24, 2007, at 2:17 PM, Kevin Sutter wrote:
>
> > Patrick,
> >
> > On 4/24/07, Patrick Linskey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > One way to do this would
> >> > be to package the work up in a Runnable and execute it in an
> >> > appropriate transactional environment.  It might be easier to
> >> > understand if the sequence code had a similar implementation.
> >>
> >> We talked about this in a thread several months ago. I
> think that the
> >> conclusion was that it'd be neat to make our
> ManagedRuntime interface
> >> have a runInNewTransaction(Runnable) method, and to move things to
> >> use that instead of doing tx logic directly inside the sequence
> >> classes.
> >> This would be an easy change; the lack of a concrete need (i.e., a
> >> server that both denied transactional control and provided
> a means to
> >> execute a Runnable in a new tx) prevented us from changing things
> >> around.
> >
> >
> > A "concrete need" is surfacing with WebSphere.  WebSphere does not
> > allow for direct transactional control (ie. suspend/resume)
> and it has
> > recently provided the means to execute a Runnable in a new
> Tx (via the
> > "runUnderUOW"
> > feature).  Although WebSphere may be the exception to the
> rule, we are
> > planning on providing the mechanism so that OpenJPA can
> play in this
> > game.
>
> Kevan,
>
> Can you ask the websphere team to support a Callable also, so
> we can easily return a value or throw an exception from the
> task?  It may also be important to runWithoutTx for databases
> that don't support transactional DDL, but I suppose that
> could be done with a new thread.
>
> -dain
>

Notice:  This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
information  of  BEA Systems,  Inc.,  its subsidiaries  and  affiliated
entities,  that may be confidential,  proprietary,  copyrighted  and/or
legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or
entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and
have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email
and then delete it.

Reply via email to