[infinispan-dev] discussion about impact of using TransactionSynchronizationRegistry in AS7...

[Mircea Markus]

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-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?
>>>> yes
>>>>>  Does Infinispan currently register synchronizations via
>>>>> TransactionSynchronizationRegistry (TSR)?
>>>> no, we register synchronizations through transaction.registerSynchronization
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm trying to get a sense for, what would happen if container managed
>>>>> (AS7) session beans were registered with the active JTA transaction via
>>>>> the TSR.
>>>>> 
>>>>> If AS7 switches to use the TSR, I think that Infinispan might need to
>>>>> ensure that it doesn't attempt to register with the TX too late.
>>>> right. One way to go  is by making the registration code pluggable.
>>> 
>>> I should point out that I believe its only a problem, to call Transaction.registerSynchronization() after the point, where the ordering cannot be correct.  However, no such checking is performed if no components are registering their syncs via TransactionSynchronizationRegistry.
>>> 
>>> So, another question, how likely would it be, that an application would see Infinispan registering a sync via Transaction.registerSynchronization(), after the transaction commit has been initiated?
>> ATM Infinispan allows the registration if the transaction is in one of the following states: Status.STATUS_ACTIVE || Status.STATUS_PREPARING. If tx is in any other state the sync won't be registered and a exception is instead sent to the user.
>>> 
>>> If Transaction.registerSynchronization() will always be called by Infinispan before the transaction commits.  We shouldn't have to be as concerned about support for registering the Infinispan syncs with TransactionSynchronizationRegistry.
>> 
>>> 
>>> If the answer is we aren't sure or Transaction.registerSynchronization() could happen after the transaction commit has been started, we should have it be pluggable.
>> 
>> From Jonathan's comment[1] I understand that "interposed Synchronizations must be called after non-interposed ones". That seems to be true disregarding tx's status. Or am I wrong?
> 
> Jonathan also commented here a few minutes ago, with further clarification of the exact rules.  Best to read what he said directly (he described the situation in much better detail than me). http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jboss-as7-dev/2011-June/002275.html
> 
> Copying from his email:
> 
> "
> 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 registerInterposedSynchronization.
> "
Thanks for the clarification. The Syncs we register do not do any subsequent Sync registration in beforeCompletion so should be on the safe side. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/infinispan-dev/attachments/20110602/6bb8e4be/attachment.html