Antoine/all,
Is it safe to assume any recent discussion about an @Asynchronous
annotation would be covered there unless e.g. EJB itself needs it to be
updated for EE 8?
Werner
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 1:06 PM, <cdi-dev-request(a)lists.jboss.org> wrote:
Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
cdi-dev-request(a)lists.jboss.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
cdi-dev-owner(a)lists.jboss.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of cdi-dev digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. [JBoss JIRA] (CDI-499) Firing events asynchronously
(Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA))
2. [JBoss JIRA] (CDI-31) Asynchronous events
(Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA))
3. [JBoss JIRA] (CDI-499) Firing events asynchronously
(Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA))
4. [JBoss JIRA] (CDI-499) Firing events asynchronously
(Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA))
5. [JBoss JIRA] (CDI-499) Firing events asynchronously
(Jos? Paumard (JIRA))
6. [JBoss JIRA] (CDI-499) Firing events asynchronously
(Jozef Hartinger (JIRA))
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 07:06:49 -0500 (EST)
From: "Jozef Hartinger (JIRA)" <issues(a)jboss.org>
Subject: [cdi-dev] [JBoss JIRA] (CDI-499) Firing events asynchronously
To: cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
Message-ID:
<JIRA.12561330.1421835166000.18078.1421842009269(a)Atlassian.JIRA>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-499?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy...
]
Jozef Hartinger commented on CDI-499:
-------------------------------------
{quote}For backward compatibility reason the possibility to invoke an
observer asynchronously should be let to the observer{quote}
What exactly are the reasons for this? I can think of one:
- observer method injecting a @RequestScoped (or similar) bean
Are there other arguments for this?
{quote}3. Observer bound to a transaction phase
these observer will be invoked in the right transaction phase but
asynchronously{quote}
How's that different from Event.fire()?
> Firing events asynchronously
> -----------------------------
>
> Key: CDI-499
> URL:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-499
> Project: CDI Specification Issues
> Issue Type: Feature Request
> Components: Events
> Affects Versions: 1.2.Final
> Reporter: Antoine Sabot-Durand
>
> We should allow a way to fire event asynchronously. This mechanism
should leverage new async API in JDK8 especially the {{CompletionStage}}
interface.
> Our proposal is:
> h2. 1. Add {{fireAsync()}} method to {{Event}} and {{BeanManager}}
> Signature of the method on {{Event<T>}} would be
> {code:java}
> <U extends T> CompletionStage<U> fireAsync(U event);
> {code}
> Signature on {{BeanManager}} would be
> {code:java}
> <T> CompletionStage<T> fireAsyncEvent(T event, Annotation...
qualifiers)
> {code}
> h2. 2. Add an {{asyncSupported()}} member to {{@Observes}}
> For backward compatibility reason the possibility to invoke an observer
asynchronously should be let to the observer (legacy observers should be
called synchronously). We propose to add the boolean {{asyncSupported()}}
member with the {{false}} default value to support this backward
compatibility aspect.
> So to be notified asynchronously an observer should have
{{asyncSupported}} member to true. otherwise it will be called
synchronously.
> h2. 3. Observer bound to a transaction phase
> these observer will be invoked in the right transaction phase but
asynchronously
> h2. 4. Event Ordering
> Should we decide to add events ordering in CDI 2.0, the order will be
keep in asynchronous observer notification. If there are a mix of
synchronous and asynchronous observer, asynchronous will be called first in
order, then synchronous in their order (async has priority on sync).
> h2. 5. Event state (payload mutability)
> We'll keep payload mutability with async events (but should explicitly
specify it). That means that we should guarantee the event state
consistency between observers and in case of ordered observers the fact
that observer N+1 get the event state at the end of observer N.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.11#6341)
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
End of cdi-dev Digest, Vol 50, Issue 42
***************************************