Re: [hibernate-dev] SynchronizationRegistry: expose read (lookup) operations?
Hi Jonathan!
So I have multiple options, but fundamentally I have an ORM
SynchronizationRegistry today. We could either follow the example of
the javax.transaction API in evolving the ORM SPI, or apparently I
could explore making our Synchronization stateless and store the state
in this other map instead, or maybe I try refactor it all to stick to
the standard APIs - however I wonder if it will still work for a JDBC
transaction.
Either way I'll take the fact that the standard API exposes such a
functionality as a sign that this could be sensible to expose.
Thanks,
Sanne
On 25 October 2017 at 15:37, Jonathan Halliday
<jonathan.halliday(a)redhat.com> wrote:
The javax.transaction version of that interface already functions as a
per-transaction hashmap, with put/get operations available. If you can use
it directly, then just pick a suitable lookup key - FQCN or even the sync
impl .class itself, since the key is Object type. If not then at least
retain the method signatures and just delegate them down through the spi.
https://docs.oracle.com/javaee/5/api/javax/transaction/TransactionSynchro...
Jonathan.
On 25/10/17 14:32, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
>
> Hi Steve,
>
> do you think it would be sensible for me to explore introducing some
> kind of synchronization lookup method on
> org.hibernate.resource.transaction.spi.SynchronizationRegistry ?
>
> Today it only exposes a `registerSynchronization` method, which we use
> extensively, but then we also have quite some complexity in the Search
> code caused by the fact that we can't look the synchronizations up in
> a later phase.
> Essentially our Synchronization is stateful and we need to update it
> later.
>
> I'd love to propose a change for ORM6 so allow registering such things
> under some kind of id (a string?) so that one can look them back.
>
> current SPI:
>
> public void registerSynchronization(Synchronization synchronization)
>
> temptative proposal (didn't try it yet..):
>
> public void registerSynchronization(String id, Synchronization
> synchronization);
>
> public void Synchronization getSynchronization(String id);
>
>
> does it sound reasonable in principle?
>
> This would imply other users should make up an id unique for their use
> case. Alternatively I could live with a Class used as an id, or we
> could have the new methods in addition to the existing method for
> people not interested in looking things up.
>
> thanks,
> Sanne
> _______________________________________________
> hibernate-dev mailing list
> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>
--
Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903
Directors: Michael Cunningham, Michael ("Mike") O'Neill, Eric Shander