Scott, if you want I can cut CR5 this morning based on what we have and then a
CR6 for next week, with the bits we originally had in mind for CR5.
I'm trying to compete with Bob McW for the largest number of release
candidates. ;)
On 9 Jun 2011, at 21:42, Scott Marlow wrote:
> As a short t
As a short term way to resolve this in AS 7.0. I'd like to have a fix
based on CR4 (since CR5 won't be available soon enough). We really need
to get this pulled together sometime tomorrow morning (June 10th) for AS
7.0.
I created a branch based on the CR4 tag for this.
https://github.com/sco
So what is the final proposed solution here?
On 8 Jun 2011, at 01:07, Scott Marlow wrote:
> I just hit this case locally. http://pastie.org/2035067
>
> This is running with a hacked AS7, in the sense that IronJacamar
> (JBJCA-594), Hibernate JPA and the EJB3.1 container are registering TSR
>
On 8 Jun 2011, at 11:57, Galder Zamarreño wrote:
> In the mean time, I can quickly modify the dummy TM to make the same check as
> JBoss TS and see whether it fails in the 2LC testsuite.
-1. Better to just switch the testsuite to use JBossTS.
--
Manik Surtani
ma...@jboss.org
twitter.com/manik
As a side note, I've just changed 2LC code to use synchronizations and it
looked good. However, it was using an old dummy TM that hooked with Hibernate's
connection provider.
It's clear that we need to move the 2LC testsuite to JBossTS to catch this
stuff early. I'll add a JIRA for this.
In th
I just hit this case locally. http://pastie.org/2035067
This is running with a hacked AS7, in the sense that IronJacamar
(JBJCA-594), Hibernate JPA and the EJB3.1 container are registering TSR
interposed synchronizations
(https://github.com/scottmarlow/jboss-as/commits/jpa_tsr).
This is for a
2011/6/2 Mircea Markus :
>>> "
>>> So, the rule for activity in beforeCompletion is:
>>>
>>> - a Sync registered via registerSynchronization may call either
>>> registerSynchronization or registerInterposedSynchronization.
>>>
>>> - a Sync registered via registerInterposedSynchronization may cal
On 06/02/2011 11:27 AM, Mircea Markus wrote:
>
> On 2 Jun 2011, at 15:09, Scott Marlow wrote:
>
>> On 06/02/2011 09:50 AM, Mircea Markus wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2 Jun 2011, at 13:19, Scott Marlow wrote:
>>>
On 06/02/2011 05:31 AM, Mircea Markus wrote:
>
> On 1 Jun 2011, at 20:49, Scott Marlo
>> "
>> So, the rule for activity in beforeCompletion is:
>>
>> - a Sync registered via registerSynchronization may call either
>> registerSynchronization or registerInterposedSynchronization.
>>
>> - a Sync registered via registerInterposedSynchronization may call only
>> registerInterposedS
On 2 Jun 2011, at 15:09, Scott Marlow wrote:
> On 06/02/2011 09:50 AM, Mircea Markus wrote:
>>
>> On 2 Jun 2011, at 13:19, Scott Marlow wrote:
>>
>>> On 06/02/2011 05:31 AM, Mircea Markus wrote:
On 1 Jun 2011, at 20:49, Scott Marlow wrote:
> I posted a message on the as7-de
On 06/02/2011 09:50 AM, Mircea Markus wrote:
>
> On 2 Jun 2011, at 13:19, Scott Marlow wrote:
>
>> On 06/02/2011 05:31 AM, Mircea Markus wrote:
>>>
>>> On 1 Jun 2011, at 20:49, Scott Marlow wrote:
>>>
I posted a message on the as7-dev ml
(http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jboss-as7-dev/201
On 2 Jun 2011, at 13:19, Scott Marlow wrote:
> On 06/02/2011 05:31 AM, Mircea Markus wrote:
>>
>> On 1 Jun 2011, at 20:49, Scott Marlow wrote:
>>
>>> I posted a message on the as7-dev ml
>>> (http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jboss-as7-dev/2011-May/002254.html),
>>> about switching to use the Tr
Both Infinispan Query and Hibernate Search register transaction
synchronizations:
org.infinispan.query.backend.TransactionalEventTransactionContext.registerSynchronization(Synchronization)
org.hibernate.search.backend.impl.EventSourceTransactionContext.registerSynchronization(Synchronization)
but
On 06/02/2011 05:31 AM, Mircea Markus wrote:
>
> On 1 Jun 2011, at 20:49, Scott Marlow wrote:
>
>> I posted a message on the as7-dev ml
>> (http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jboss-as7-dev/2011-May/002254.html),
>> about switching to use the TransactionSynchronizationRegistry.
>>
>> Does Infinispan c
On 2 Jun 2011, at 10:31, Mircea Markus wrote:
>
> On 1 Jun 2011, at 20:49, Scott Marlow wrote:
>
>> I posted a message on the as7-dev ml
>> (http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jboss-as7-dev/2011-May/002254.html),
>> about switching to use the TransactionSynchronizationRegistry.
>>
>> Does Infi
On 1 Jun 2011, at 20:49, Scott Marlow wrote:
> I posted a message on the as7-dev ml
> (http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jboss-as7-dev/2011-May/002254.html),
> about switching to use the TransactionSynchronizationRegistry.
>
> Does Infinispan currently register Transaction synchronization objec
I posted a message on the as7-dev ml
(http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jboss-as7-dev/2011-May/002254.html),
about switching to use the TransactionSynchronizationRegistry.
Does Infinispan currently register Transaction synchronization objects?
Does Infinispan currently register synchronization
17 matches
Mail list logo
