Gary is correct. The EXTERNAL transaction manager does nothing.
Larry On 10/19/05, Gary Barlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My understanding is that when an external transaction manager is used that > startTransaction call does NOT start a new transaction. I have tested this > in a weblogic EJB container and it works as expected. The container still > has controll over the transaction. > > Gary > > > > >Hi Clinton, > > Just a bit confused. > > Want to clarify this thing. > > Do you mean to say that when a EXTERNAL transaction manager is used, > >the startTransaction will start a new transaction and will not participate > >in the parent transaction. And if the JTA transaction manager is used, it > >will not start a new transaction and will participate in the parent > >transaction? > > > >Many Thanks > >Priyesh > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Clinton Begin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tue 18/10/2005 23:30 > > To: [email protected] > > Cc: > > Subject: Re: Batch not batching! > > > > > > > > Yes. This allows you to code in one consistent way, whether you're > > in a > >global or a local transaction scope. > > > > Cheers, > > Clinton > > > > > > On 10/18/05, Gary Barlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I'm running in WebLogic and use it's pooled DataSource rather > > than an > > explicit TransactionManager configuration. I guess that > > amounts to the > >same > > thing as EXTERNAL? > > > > Are you saying that calling start/end transaction is > > necessary for the > > ibatis batch statement to work but will have no effect on the > > transaction > > which is managed by the container? > > > > Thanks > > > > Gary > > > > > > > >If you set the TransactionManager type to EXTERNAL, then the > > >start/commit/end will have no effect. Or if you set it to > > JTA, then it > >will > > >attempt to participate in the global transaction if possible. > > > > > >Cheers, > > >Clinton > > > > > > > > > > ><< winmail.dat >> > > >
