March 2017 - cdi-dev - Jboss List Archives

Behavior of CDI fireAsync when using CompletionStage.whenCompleteAsync

by John Ament

Run into an interesting issue. Not sure if its an RI problem, or something else. Actually not even sure if its a problem just surprised me. I have two very simple main methods here: try(SeContainer container = SeContainerInitializer.newInstance() .addPackages(Pojo.class) .disableDiscovery() .initialize()) { Event<Object> event = container.getBeanManager().getEvent(); FixedThreadPoolExecutorServices executorServices = new FixedThreadPoolExecutorServices(2); CompletionStage<Pojo> completionStage = event.fireAsync(new Pojo("this is asynchronous"), NotificationOptions.ofExecutor(executorServices.getTaskExecutor())); completionStage.whenCompleteAsync((pojo, throwable) -> event.fire(new Pojo(pojo.showName() + ", and now this is synchronous"))); Thread.sleep(500L); } public static void main(String...args) throws Exception{ try(SeContainer container = SeContainerInitializer.newInstance() .addPackages(Pojo.class) .disableDiscovery() .initialize()) { Event<Object> event = container.getBeanManager().getEvent(); CompletionStage<Pojo> completionStage = event.fireAsync(new Pojo("this is asynchronous")); completionStage.whenCompleteAsync((pojo, throwable) -> event.fire(new Pojo(pojo.showName() + ", and now this is synchronous"))); Thread.sleep(500L); } } In the first, I'm using a custom executor (a 2 thread pool executor) and the latter just using the default unspecified version, which weld seems to use a fork-join pool. In both of these examples, I use the whenCompleteAsync method. in the first method, I always see the fired event being handled in a different thread than what handled the first event. In the second method, I always see the fired events both being handled in the same thread. Is that just the behavior of fork-join? Or something special happening? John ________________________________ NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information which should be treated accordingly. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this message, and destroy all physical and electronic copies. Thank you.

7 years, 9 months

3
2
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-694) Make an observer that uses both @Observes and @ObservesAsync forbidden

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-694?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand commented on CDI-694: ------------------------------------------ Totally agree with you [~mkouba] > Make an observer that uses both @Observes and @ObservesAsync forbidden > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-694 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-694 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Reporter: John Ament > Fix For: 2.0 .Final > > > Not explicitly called out in the spec text, we should make an observer that has both annotations forbidden. > RI presently throws a DefinitionException. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.2.3#72005)

7 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-695) Allow stereotypes to include priority annotations

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-695?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand commented on CDI-695: ------------------------------------------ IMO, I think it would bring more confusion than useful: * A Stereotype is usually created to be used on many elements. What would be the interest to apply same priority in different places? * {{@Priority}} is used and activate Interceptors and Alternatives and not having this info directly on the element can be source of confusion IMO. Could you give a use case where it could be interesting to have this? > Allow stereotypes to include priority annotations > ------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-695 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-695 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Reporter: John Ament > > Stereotypes can include things like Alternative. However, there is no mention as to whether or not Priority can be included in the stereotype definition. I feel it would be useful to be included. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.2.3#72005)

7 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-694) Make an observer that uses both @Observes and @ObservesAsync forbidden

by Martin Kouba (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-694?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Martin Kouba commented on CDI-694: ---------------------------------- It's always better to say what happens if a rule is violated. > Make an observer that uses both @Observes and @ObservesAsync forbidden > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-694 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-694 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Reporter: John Ament > Fix For: 2.0 .Final > > > Not explicitly called out in the spec text, we should make an observer that has both annotations forbidden. > RI presently throws a DefinitionException. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.2.3#72005)

7 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-694) Make an observer that uses both @Observes and @ObservesAsync forbidden

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-694?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand updated CDI-694: ------------------------------------- Fix Version/s: 2.0 .Final > Make an observer that uses both @Observes and @ObservesAsync forbidden > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-694 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-694 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Reporter: John Ament > Fix For: 2.0 .Final > > > Not explicitly called out in the spec text, we should make an observer that has both annotations forbidden. > RI presently throws a DefinitionException. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.2.3#72005)

7 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-694) Make an observer that uses both @Observes and @ObservesAsync forbidden

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-694?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand commented on CDI-694: ------------------------------------------ Well, section [10.4.2|http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/2.0-PRD/cdi-spec.html#observes] start with the following mention: {quote}An observer method may be declared by annotating a parameter {{(a)javax.enterprise.event.Observes}} *or* {{(a)javax.enterprise.event.ObservesAsync}} of a default-access{quote} But we could add a mention to say when and how the container should handle such a conflict. > Make an observer that uses both @Observes and @ObservesAsync forbidden > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-694 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-694 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Reporter: John Ament > Fix For: 2.0 .Final > > > Not explicitly called out in the spec text, we should make an observer that has both annotations forbidden. > RI presently throws a DefinitionException. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.2.3#72005)

7 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-695) Allow stereotypes to include priority annotations

by John Ament (JIRA)

John Ament created CDI-695: ------------------------------ Summary: Allow stereotypes to include priority annotations Key: CDI-695 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-695 Project: CDI Specification Issues Issue Type: Feature Request Reporter: John Ament Stereotypes can include things like Alternative. However, there is no mention as to whether or not Priority can be included in the stereotype definition. I feel it would be useful to be included. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.2.3#72005)

7 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-692) isResolvable missing from 5.6.1

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-692?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand commented on CDI-692: ------------------------------------------ We're both right: it is mentioned in the spec text, but not in the code bloc for {{Instance}} interface at the beginning of 5.6.1. > isResolvable missing from 5.6.1 > ------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-692 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-692 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Reporter: John Ament > Fix For: 2.0 .Final > > > Section 5.6.1 is missing the new isResolvable method http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/2.0.Beta1/cdi-spec.html#dynamic_lookup -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.2.3#72005)

7 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-692) isResolvable missing from 5.6.1

by Martin Kouba (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-692?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Martin Kouba commented on CDI-692: ---------------------------------- bq. Your point is valid: isResolvable() is missing in all spec versions. It's definitely not. See also "5.6.1. The Instance interface": bq. The methods isUnsatisfied(), isAmbiguous() and isResolvable() must: ... > isResolvable missing from 5.6.1 > ------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-692 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-692 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Reporter: John Ament > Fix For: 2.0 .Final > > > Section 5.6.1 is missing the new isResolvable method http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/2.0.Beta1/cdi-spec.html#dynamic_lookup -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.2.3#72005)

7 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-692) isResolvable missing from 5.6.1

by Tomas Remes (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-692?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Tomas Remes commented on CDI-692: --------------------------------- In the link I posted above is {{isResolvable}} method mentioned. > isResolvable missing from 5.6.1 > ------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-692 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-692 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Reporter: John Ament > Fix For: 2.0 .Final > > > Section 5.6.1 is missing the new isResolvable method http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/2.0.Beta1/cdi-spec.html#dynamic_lookup -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.2.3#72005)

7 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

cdi-dev March 2017