[rules-users] JTA question

[Mark Proctor]

Kris Verlaenen wrote:
> Allen,
>
> We selected JPA and JTA because they appear to be the standards for
> persistence and transaction currently.  When you say incompatible, do
> you mean that the WebSphere transaction manager isn't JTA compliant,
> that we are using JTA features that WebSphere does not support, or that
> it is a custom transaction solution?
>
> Note that persistence and transactions is defined as an orthogonal
> concern, meaning you can easily replace it by another implementation
> without having to redefine everything.  I'm more than happy to work with
> you on making this work on WebSphere.  If you want to take a look at our
> transaction implementation, take a look at SingleSessionCommandService:
> http://anonsvn.jboss.org/repos/labs/labs/jbossrules/trunk/drools-persistence-jpa/src/main/java/org/drools/persistence/session/SingleSessionCommandService.java
>
> As you can see, there are only a few calls to the transaction manager
> before and after the execution of the commands (supporting both
> user-defined or default transactions).  Shouldn't be too difficult to
> either replace that with another transaction implementation, or make the
> solution more generic to support multiple ones altogether.
>   
I can concur that the plan was always to support other transaction 
models, but to target JTA first as it's an established standard. Beyond 
that we wanted to make sure our direction was user driven.

Mark
> Kris
>
> Quoting Allen Day <DayAK at ldschurch.org>:
>
>   
>> I am new to this list, so I apologize if this question has been asked
>> before.
>>
>> It appears that drools-flow requires JTA in order to use JPA.  Is
>> anybody using drools-flow running on WebSphere, because WebSphere
>> uses its' own transaction manager (and the two don't seem
>> compatible).  Has anybody looked at the feature request to provide
>> support for resource local transactions -
>> https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBRULES-2289
>>
>> We need to decide soon between Drools Flow & JBPM, and this issue
>> could swing in JBPM's favor.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>   Allen
>>
>>
>>  NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended
>> recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
>> Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is
>> prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
>> sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original
>> message.
>>
>>
>>
>>     
>
>
>
>
> Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
>   

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20091029/fe491ee9/attachment.html