It is better to have an interceptor because the CacheListeners don't know about transactions (maybe they do, now ?). So PUT1, PUT2, PUT3 in a TX would all get replicated with a CacheListener, and - when rolling back the TX - the UNDO ops would get replicated too. This is not the case with an interceptor. Yes, interceptors are tied to JBossCache,, but this solution *is* for JBossCache, so no worries from my side. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4102593#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...