Re: Possible problem with ddl with only a jta-datasource and sequences
On Apr 24, 2007, at 11:38 AM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
David-
Does this seem like a reasonable explanation?
That sounds right to me.
Note that if we ever update OpenJPA to depend solely on the
TransactionSynchronizationRegistry, then we won't be able to do
things like suspending the transactions and resuming it later with
the jta-datasource.
That's why we have two datasources for an EMF. One is the
transactional datasource that gives you connections automatically
enlisted in your transactional EM; the other gives you connections
that are never enlisted and can be used for nontransactional queries,
nontransactional sequences etc. The TSR is only of use for the
enlisted datasource/connection.
Craig
On Apr 24, 2007, at 10:52 AM, David Jencks wrote:
Using derby, jta transactions (in geronimo), a table sequence,
autocreation of tables, and only a jta-datasource, I get errors
complaining that the sequence table doesn't exist.
Caused by: org.apache.openjpa.lib.jdbc.ReportingSQLException:
Table/View 'OPENJPASEQ' does not exist. {SELECT SEQUENCE_VALUE
FROM OPENJPASEQ WHERE ID = ? FOR UPDATE WITH RR} [code=2,
state=42X05]
If I supply a non-jta-datasource everything works fine.
My current theory about why this is happening is that the ddl to
create all the tables is executed in a connection from the jta-
datasource that's enrolled in a jta transaction. Then we go to
get an id from the sequence, the jta transaction is suspended, and
a new tx is started, in which the ddl is not visible since the jta
tx wasn't committed. (apparently ddl in derby is transactional)
Does this seem like a reasonable explanation?
I'm going to look for a way to run the ddl inside a separate
transaction that can be committed, the same as how sequences work
without a non-jta-datasource. 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.
thanks
david jencks
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
RE: Possible problem with ddl with only a jta-datasource and sequences
That's why we have two datasources for an EMF. One is the
transactional datasource that gives you connections
automatically enlisted in your transactional EM; the other
gives you connections that are never enlisted and can be used
for nontransactional queries, nontransactional sequences etc.
The TSR is only of use for the enlisted datasource/connection.
That's one approach for out-of-band work. But, there are other ways to
do such work also, without requiring multiple datasources. For example,
suspending the current tx, starting a new one, doing the work,
committing, and resuming the old one is a workable solution, if you have
access to the tx.
-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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 10:05 AM
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 11:38 AM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
David-
Does this seem like a reasonable explanation?
That sounds right to me.
Note that if we ever update OpenJPA to depend solely on the
TransactionSynchronizationRegistry, then we won't be able
to do things
like suspending the transactions and resuming it later with the
jta-datasource.
That's why we have two datasources for an EMF. One is the
transactional datasource that gives you connections
automatically enlisted in your transactional EM; the other
gives you connections that are never enlisted and can be used
for nontransactional queries, nontransactional sequences etc.
The TSR is only of use for the enlisted datasource/connection.
Craig
On Apr 24, 2007, at 10:52 AM, David Jencks wrote:
Using derby, jta transactions (in geronimo), a table sequence,
autocreation of tables, and only a jta-datasource, I get errors
complaining that the sequence table doesn't exist.
Caused by: org.apache.openjpa.lib.jdbc.ReportingSQLException:
Table/View 'OPENJPASEQ' does not exist. {SELECT
SEQUENCE_VALUE FROM
OPENJPASEQ WHERE ID = ? FOR UPDATE WITH RR} [code=2,
state=42X05]
If I supply a non-jta-datasource everything works fine.
My current theory about why this is happening is that the ddl to
create all the tables is executed in a connection from the jta-
datasource that's enrolled in a jta transaction. Then we
go to get
an id from the sequence, the jta transaction is suspended,
and a new
tx is started, in which the ddl is not visible since the jta tx
wasn't committed. (apparently ddl in derby is transactional)
Does this seem like a reasonable explanation?
I'm going to look for a way to run the ddl inside a separate
transaction that can be committed, the same as how sequences work
without a non-jta-datasource. 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.
thanks
david jencks
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
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.
Re: Possible problem with ddl with only a jta-datasource and sequences
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.
Re: Possible problem with ddl with only a jta-datasource and sequences
Hi Partick,
On Apr 25, 2007, at 11:41 AM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
That's why we have two datasources for an EMF. One is the
transactional datasource that gives you connections
automatically enlisted in your transactional EM; the other
gives you connections that are never enlisted and can be used
for nontransactional queries, nontransactional sequences etc.
The TSR is only of use for the enlisted datasource/connection.
That's one approach for out-of-band work. But, there are other ways to
do such work also, without requiring multiple datasources. For
example,
suspending the current tx, starting a new one, doing the work,
committing, and resuming the old one is a workable solution, if you
have
access to the tx.
My comment was that the two-datasource approach works for all
configurations that I know of, and doesn't depend on the existence of
mutliple non-standardized interfaces by which the transaction service
providers have granted grudging access to their transaction control
mechanism.
There was agreement with TSR on the basic functionality that all
transaction service providers would support. Some vendors pushed back
when we tried to expand the functionality.
If everyone has extra functionality why is it so hard to come to a
common set of features? There's no intrinsic value in one app server
giving access via Proprietary Interface 1 and another app server
giving the same access via Proprietary Interface 2.
What we were able to get with TSR interface was agreement as to how
to deal with transaction-enlisted connections. Perhaps we need to go
back (Umbrella JSR for Java EE 6) and make a bigger fuss over the
additional needed functionality.
Craig
-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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 10:05 AM
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 11:38 AM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
David-
Does this seem like a reasonable explanation?
That sounds right to me.
Note that if we ever update OpenJPA to depend solely on the
TransactionSynchronizationRegistry, then we won't be able
to do things
like suspending the transactions and resuming it later with the
jta-datasource.
That's why we have two datasources for an EMF. One is the
transactional datasource that gives you connections
automatically enlisted in your transactional EM; the other
gives you connections that are never enlisted and can be used
for nontransactional queries, nontransactional sequences etc.
The TSR is only of use for the enlisted datasource/connection.
Craig
On Apr 24, 2007, at 10:52 AM, David Jencks wrote:
Using derby, jta transactions (in geronimo), a table sequence,
autocreation of tables, and only a jta-datasource, I get errors
complaining that the sequence table doesn't exist.
Caused by: org.apache.openjpa.lib.jdbc.ReportingSQLException:
Table/View 'OPENJPASEQ' does not exist. {SELECT
SEQUENCE_VALUE FROM
OPENJPASEQ WHERE ID = ? FOR UPDATE WITH RR} [code=2,
state=42X05]
If I supply a non-jta-datasource everything works fine.
My current theory about why this is happening is that the ddl to
create all the tables is executed in a connection from the jta-
datasource that's enrolled in a jta transaction. Then we
go to get
an id from the sequence, the jta transaction is suspended,
and a new
tx is started, in which the ddl is not visible since the jta tx
wasn't committed. (apparently ddl in derby is transactional)
Does this seem like a reasonable explanation?
I'm going to look for a way to run the ddl inside a separate
transaction that can be committed, the same as how sequences work
without a non-jta-datasource. 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.
thanks
david jencks
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/
jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
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
RE: Possible problem with ddl with only a jta-datasource and sequences
If everyone has extra functionality why is it so hard to come to a common set of features? There's no intrinsic value in one app server giving access via Proprietary Interface 1 and another app server giving the same access via Proprietary Interface 2. I think that the issue at the time was that some people were unwilling to expose begin / commit / rollback / suspend / resume APIs, but sadly nobody (on either side of the debate) realized that a compromise executeRunnableInNewTransaction(Runnable) would be acceptible all around. -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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 3:48 PM To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Possible problem with ddl with only a jta-datasource and sequences Hi Partick, On Apr 25, 2007, at 11:41 AM, Patrick Linskey wrote: That's why we have two datasources for an EMF. One is the transactional datasource that gives you connections automatically enlisted in your transactional EM; the other gives you connections that are never enlisted and can be used for nontransactional queries, nontransactional sequences etc. The TSR is only of use for the enlisted datasource/connection. That's one approach for out-of-band work. But, there are other ways to do such work also, without requiring multiple datasources. For example, suspending the current tx, starting a new one, doing the work, committing, and resuming the old one is a workable solution, if you have access to the tx. My comment was that the two-datasource approach works for all configurations that I know of, and doesn't depend on the existence of mutliple non-standardized interfaces by which the transaction service providers have granted grudging access to their transaction control mechanism. There was agreement with TSR on the basic functionality that all transaction service providers would support. Some vendors pushed back when we tried to expand the functionality. If everyone has extra functionality why is it so hard to come to a common set of features? There's no intrinsic value in one app server giving access via Proprietary Interface 1 and another app server giving the same access via Proprietary Interface 2. What we were able to get with TSR interface was agreement as to how to deal with transaction-enlisted connections. Perhaps we need to go back (Umbrella JSR for Java EE 6) and make a bigger fuss over the additional needed functionality. Craig -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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 10:05 AM 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 11:38 AM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote: David- Does this seem like a reasonable explanation? That sounds right to me. Note that if we ever update OpenJPA to depend solely on the TransactionSynchronizationRegistry, then we won't be able to do things like suspending the transactions and resuming it later with the jta-datasource. That's why we have two datasources for an EMF. One is the transactional datasource that gives you connections automatically enlisted in your transactional EM; the other gives you connections that are never enlisted and can be used for nontransactional queries, nontransactional sequences etc. The TSR is only of use for the enlisted datasource/connection. Craig On Apr 24, 2007, at 10:52 AM, David Jencks wrote: Using derby, jta transactions (in geronimo), a table sequence, autocreation of tables, and only a jta-datasource, I get errors complaining that the sequence
RE: Possible problem with ddl with only a jta-datasource and sequences
suspend/resume) and it has recently provided the means to
execute a Runnable in a new Tx (via the runUnderUOW feature)
Yay!
It should be very easy to restructure our existing code to move the
relevant logic to a Runnable.
-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: Kevin Sutter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 2:18 PM
To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Possible problem with ddl with only a
jta-datasource and sequences
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.
Kevin
-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: David Jencks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 10:53 AM
To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Possible problem with ddl with only a jta-datasource and
sequences
Using derby, jta transactions (in geronimo), a table sequence,
autocreation of tables, and only a jta-datasource, I get errors
complaining that the sequence table doesn't exist.
Caused by: org.apache.openjpa.lib.jdbc.ReportingSQLException:
Table/ View 'OPENJPASEQ' does not exist. {SELECT
SEQUENCE_VALUE FROM
OPENJPASEQ WHERE ID = ? FOR UPDATE WITH RR} [code=2,
state=42X05]
If I supply a non-jta-datasource everything works fine.
My current theory about why this is happening is that the ddl to
create all the tables is executed in a connection from the
jta- datasource that's enrolled in a jta transaction.
Then we go to
get an id from the sequence, the jta transaction is
suspended, and a
new tx is started, in which the ddl is not visible since
the jta tx
wasn't committed. (apparently ddl in derby is transactional)
Does this seem like a reasonable explanation?
I'm going to look for a way to run the ddl inside a separate
transaction that can be committed, the same as how sequences work
without a non-jta-datasource. 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.
thanks
david jencks
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.
RE: Possible problem with ddl with only a jta-datasource and sequences
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? 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.
