June 2007 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Invalid JORAM Test

by timfox

BTW - you should inform the JORAM guys about the invalid tests so they can correct them. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4055740#4055740 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4055740

18 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: JBAS-4489 - Suspending Incomplete BMT transactions

by bdecoste

I'd Burke him to be safe. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4055737#4055737 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4055737

18 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Invalid JORAM Test

by timfox

I would say the JORAM test is invalid. setClientID() is supposed to throw an exception unless it is the first operation called on the connection. In your case, you are calling getClientID() first, so it is correct to throw an exception: See http://java.sun.com/j2ee/1.4/docs/api/index.html View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4055736#4055736 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4055736

18 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: JBAS-4489 - Suspending Incomplete BMT transactions

by andy.miller＠jboss.com

Wolf Adrian at you own risk ;-) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4055735#4055735 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4055735

18 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: JBAS-4489 - Suspending Incomplete BMT transactions

by wolfc

But that means no exception is thrown. Ah wait, now I see. boolean gotException = true; Does this mean I can Wolf Adrian? :-) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4055726#4055726 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4055726

18 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: JBAS-4489 - Suspending Incomplete BMT transactions

by andy.miller＠jboss.com

Carlo, as I understand it from the initial thread on this topic, when the transaction times out, JBoss Transactions will set the transaction status to ROLLEDBACK, so what you are seeing is the correct behavior for the test case. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4055724#4055724 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4055724

18 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - JORAM Tests failing...

by clebert.suconic＠jboss.com

Another JORAM Test is failing.. but this time I think it's a bug: I have written a similar test to testSetClientID on ConnectionTest... public void testSetClientID2() throws Exception | { | Connection connection = cf.createConnection(); | if (connection.getClientID() == null) | { | connection.setClientID("publisherConnection"); | } | | connection.close(); | } | This is throwing "javax.jms.IllegalStateException: setClientID can only be called directly after the connection is created" Testing for set ClientID is making something dirty.. so we can't setClientID... http://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBMESSAGING-995 View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4055720#4055720 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4055720

18 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: JBAS-4489 - Suspending Incomplete BMT transactions

by wolfc

Hmm, after a timeout the status is set to ROLLEDBACK. I can't see whether this due to timeout or ut.rollback(). View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4055703#4055703 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4055703

18 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Transaction Services] - Re: JBossTS Tx timeout (with CMT beans)

by mark.little＠jboss.com

"dimitris(a)jboss.org" wrote : Unless there is a strong reason not to, we should really change Tx Reaper Mode to DYNAMIC, that was how the old TM behaved and how applications are coded. All the old TM did was mark the transactions for rollback at that time, i.e., place them into a state from which they could only ever roll back. It didn't roll them back then though. That came later (potentially never), when the creating thread terminated the transaction. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4055702#4055702 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4055702

18 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Transaction Services] - Re: JBossTS Tx timeout (with CMT beans)

by mark.little＠jboss.com

"jhalliday" wrote : BTW I'm pretty sure the docs are wrong - The timeout value is in ms, not microsecs. Try setting the mode to DYNAMIC or keep NORMAL but shorten the txReaperTimeout from 120000 to 2000 or so. There's definitely an inconsistency in the docs: "The default checking period is 120000 milliseconds, but can be overridden by setting the com.arjuna.ats.arjuna.coordinator.txReaperTimeout property variable to another valid value, in microseconds." The reference to microseconds should be milliseconds. http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBTM-236 View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4055698#4055698 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4055698

18 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums June 2007