<p dir="ltr">+1 for ee concurrency</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">Le 17 janv. 2015 13:53, "Mark Struberg" <<a href="mailto:struberg@yahoo.de">struberg@yahoo.de</a>> a écrit :<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">EE concurrency spec needs an update anyway. It currently doesn't explicitly require @RequestScoped beans to be supported on a new Thread. That breaks tons of frameworks and makes it barely usable in EE7.<br>
<br>
LieGrue,<br>
strub<br>
<br>
On Saturday, 17 January 2015, 13:12, arjan tijms <<a href="mailto:arjan.tijms@gmail.com">arjan.tijms@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
<br>
><br>
><br>
>Hi,<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
>On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Antonio Goncalves <<a href="mailto:antonio.goncalves@gmail.com">antonio.goncalves@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
>@arjan Your example is base on ManagedExecutorService from the Java EE Concurrency spec. That's one topic we've been wondering about : should the @Asynchronous interceptor go to the Java EE Concurrency spec or not ? But it looks like the spec might not be updated.<br>
><br>
><br>
>The example I showed here would IMHO best be placed in the Java EE Concurrency spec. That would in my opinion be a perfect analogy to @Transactional and JTA. As given, the interceptor uses CDI/Interceptors and Concurrency, so theoretically it could also be put into a third spec.<br>
><br>
><br>
>Personally I would find it strange to put something in spec A, when it may better belong in spec B, just because spec B is not updated. What's holding the update of Java EE Concurrency back? If most of the EG members would be of the opinion that an @Asynchronous interceptor belongs best in Java EE Concurrency, then we can just update that spec, right?<br>
><br>
><br>
>I know that MR releases can be quite fast and agile process wise, while still packing some punch. JTA 1.2 itself was just such an MR, and JASPIC 1.1 was too. I was somewhat involved with JASPIC 1.1 (as community member) and I think the setup time was pretty fast. Mid feb 2013 we created the JIRA issues, the MR draft was published early march 2013 and the release was with EE 7 end may 2013.<br>
><br>
><br>
>If it would just be about putting a few interceptors formally in Java EE Concurrency, then why not do such small update for it?<br>
><br>
><br>
>Kind regards,<br>
>Arjan<br>
><br>
><br>
>><br>
>>Antonio<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>>On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 12:32 AM, arjan tijms <<a href="mailto:arjan.tijms@gmail.com">arjan.tijms@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>>Hi,<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>>On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Jozef Hartinger <<a href="mailto:jharting@redhat.com">jharting@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>>Hi Arjan,<br>
>>>><br>
>>>>I did some changes recently in Weld interceptors and this usecase<br>
now works smoothly. The code is not part of a release yet. See this<br>
test for a simple implementation of an @Async interceptor (basically<br>
the same as your initial attempt). Note that the chain is repeatable<br>
but at the same time it is not reset after dispatch to a different<br>
thread so you no longer need the ThreadLocal nor any other<br>
workaround.<br>
>>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>>That's quite a coincidence, it's indeed rather similar ;)<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>>I wonder how it now works though, as the InvocationContext "ctx" does not seem to be made aware that it's been dispatched to a different thread from within the code. Does it use an internal thread local to keep state or so?<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>>I'll also try to see what this does on OWB. Do you think this is something that should work, or just something that Weld happens to support regardless of the spec?<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>>Kind regards,<br>
>>>Arjan<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>>><a href="https://github.com/weld/core/blob/master/tests-arquillian/src/test/java/org/jboss/weld/tests/interceptors/thread/async/AsyncInterceptor.java" target="_blank">https://github.com/weld/core/blob/master/tests-arquillian/src/test/java/org/jboss/weld/tests/interceptors/thread/async/AsyncInterceptor.java</a><br>
>>>><br>
>>>>Jozef<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>>On 01/16/2015 06:17 PM, arjan tijms wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>>Hi,<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
I'm attempting to emulate EJB's @Asynchronous in CDI using interceptors.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>>Originally I had defined my interceptor as follows;<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>>@Interceptor<br>
>>>>>@Asynchronous<br>
>>>>>@Priority(APPLICATION)<br>
>>>>>public class AsynchronousInterceptor implements Serializable {<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> @Resource<br>
>>>>> private ManagedExecutorService managedExecutorService;<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> @AroundInvoke<br>
>>>>> public Object submitAsync(InvocationContext ctx) throws<br>
Exception {<br>
>>>>> return new<br>
FutureDelegator(managedExecutorService.submit( ()-> {<br>
return ctx.proceed(); } ));<br>
>>>>> }<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>>}<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>>With FutureDelegator as follows:<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>>public class FutureDelegator implements Future<Object> {<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> private Future<?> future;<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> public FutureDelegator(Future<?> future) {<br>
>>>>> this.future = future;<br>
>>>>> }<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> @Override<br>
>>>>> public Object get() throws InterruptedException,<br>
ExecutionException {<br>
>>>>> AsyncResult<?> asyncResult =<br>
(AsyncResult<?>) future.get();<br>
>>>>> if (asyncResult == null) {<br>
>>>>> return null;<br>
>>>>> }<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> return asyncResult.get();<br>
>>>>> }<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> @Override<br>
>>>>> public Object get(long timeout, TimeUnit unit) throws<br>
InterruptedException, ExecutionException, TimeoutException<br>
{<br>
>>>>> AsyncResult<?> asyncResult =<br>
(AsyncResult<?>) future.get(timeout, unit);<br>
>>>>> if (asyncResult == null) {<br>
>>>>> return null;<br>
>>>>> }<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> return asyncResult.get();<br>
>>>>> }<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> @Override<br>
>>>>> public boolean cancel(boolean mayInterruptIfRunning) {<br>
>>>>> return future.cancel(mayInterruptIfRunning);<br>
>>>>> }<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> @Override<br>
>>>>> public boolean isCancelled() {<br>
>>>>> return future.isCancelled();<br>
>>>>> }<br>
>>>>> @Override<br>
>>>>> public boolean isDone() {<br>
>>>>> return future.isDone();<br>
>>>>> }<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>>}<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>>This of course didn't quite work, as the InvocationContext will be reset after the @AroundInvoke method returns, and an infinite intercept loop results (on Weld).<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>>I got it to work though on Weld by using a thread local check<br>
to break that loop:<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>>@Interceptor<br>
>>>>>@Asynchronous<br>
>>>>>@Priority(PLATFORM_BEFORE)<br>
>>>>>public class AsynchronousInterceptor implements Serializable {<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> @Resource<br>
>>>>> private ManagedExecutorService managedExecutorService;<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> private static final ThreadLocal<Boolean><br>
asyncInvocation = new ThreadLocal<Boolean>();<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> @AroundInvoke<br>
>>>>> public synchronized Object submitAsync(InvocationContext<br>
ctx) throws Exception {<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> if (TRUE.equals(asyncInvocation.get())) {<br>
>>>>> return ctx.proceed();<br>
>>>>> }<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> return new<br>
FutureDelegator(managedExecutorService.submit( ()-> {<br>
>>>>> try {<br>
>>>>> asyncInvocation.set(TRUE);<br>
>>>>> return ctx.proceed();<br>
>>>>> } finally {<br>
>>>>> asyncInvocation.remove();<br>
>>>>> }<br>
>>>>> }));<br>
>>>>> }<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>>}<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>>But I've got a feeling this works just by chance and not because the workaround is so clever.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>>What do you guys think, what would be the best way to support this with the current CDI version? Or would CDI/Interceptors need something like Servlet's async support, where the InvocationContext is put into async mode whereafter it "simply" allows an other thread to continue processing on it?<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>>Kind regards,<br>
>>>>>Arjan Tijms<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>>_______________________________________________<br>
cdi-dev mailing list <a href="mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org">cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org</a> <a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev</a> Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the code under the Apache License, Version 2 (<a href="http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html" target="_blank">http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html</a>). For all other ideas provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other intellectual property rights inherent in such information.<br>
>>>><br>
>>><br>
>>>_______________________________________________<br>
>>>cdi-dev mailing list<br>
>>><a href="mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org">cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org</a><br>
>>><a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev</a><br>
>>><br>
>>>Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the code under the Apache License, Version 2 (<a href="http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html" target="_blank">http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html</a>). For all other ideas provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other intellectual property rights inherent in such information.<br>
>>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>>--<br>
>><br>
>>Antonio Goncalves<br>
>>Software architect, Java Champion and Pluralsight author<br>
>><br>
>>Web site | Twitter | LinkedIn | Pluralsight | Paris JUG | Devoxx France<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
>_______________________________________________<br>
>cdi-dev mailing list<br>
><a href="mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org">cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org</a><br>
><a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev</a><br>
><br>
>Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the code under the Apache License, Version 2 (<a href="http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html" target="_blank">http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html</a>). For all other ideas provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other intellectual property rights inherent in such information.<br>
><br>
><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
cdi-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org">cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev</a><br>
<br>
Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the code under the Apache License, Version 2 (<a href="http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html" target="_blank">http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html</a>). For all other ideas provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other intellectual property rights inherent in such information.<br>
</blockquote></div>