[JBoss JIRA] (WFLY-11579) Description of transaction timeout is misleading
by Miroslav Novak (Jira)
Miroslav Novak created WFLY-11579:
-------------------------------------
Summary: Description of transaction timeout is misleading
Key: WFLY-11579
URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-11579
Project: WildFly
Issue Type: Bug
Components: JMS
Affects Versions: 15.0.0.Beta1, 14.0.0.Final
Reporter: Miroslav Novak
Assignee: Jeff Mesnil
In /subsystem=messaging-activemq/server=default is described attribute:
{code}
"transaction-timeout" => {
"type" => LONG,
"description" => "How long (in ms) before a transaction can be removed from the resource manager after create time.",
{code}
which is misleading. Based on code review if Artemis transaction is part of XA transaction or one-phase but still under coordination of Transaction Manager then this timeout is changed by Transaction Manager to timeout defined in transaction subsystem:
{code}
[standalone@localhost:9990 subsystem=transactions] :read-resource
{
"outcome" => "success",
"result" => {
"default-timeout" => 300,
{code}
We should provide this information to description of transaction-timeout attribute in messaging-activemq subsystem.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.12.1#712002)
5 years, 10 months
[JBoss JIRA] (WFLY-11579) Description of transaction timeout is misleading
by Miroslav Novak (Jira)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-11579?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin... ]
Miroslav Novak reassigned WFLY-11579:
-------------------------------------
Assignee: ehsavoie Hugonnet (was: Jeff Mesnil)
> Description of transaction timeout is misleading
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WFLY-11579
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-11579
> Project: WildFly
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: JMS
> Affects Versions: 14.0.0.Final, 15.0.0.Beta1
> Reporter: Miroslav Novak
> Assignee: ehsavoie Hugonnet
> Priority: Major
>
> In /subsystem=messaging-activemq/server=default is described attribute:
> {code}
> "transaction-timeout" => {
> "type" => LONG,
> "description" => "How long (in ms) before a transaction can be removed from the resource manager after create time.",
> {code}
> which is misleading. Based on code review if Artemis transaction is part of XA transaction or one-phase but still under coordination of Transaction Manager then this timeout is changed by Transaction Manager to timeout defined in transaction subsystem:
> {code}
> [standalone@localhost:9990 subsystem=transactions] :read-resource
> {
> "outcome" => "success",
> "result" => {
> "default-timeout" => 300,
> {code}
> We should provide this information to description of transaction-timeout attribute in messaging-activemq subsystem.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.12.1#712002)
5 years, 10 months
[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-3481) Data type constraints: DMN canvas view workflow
by Liz Clayton (Jira)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/DROOLS-3481?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugi... ]
Liz Clayton commented on DROOLS-3481:
-------------------------------------
Thanks [~manstis], let me know what you think [~karreiro].
Quick aside: I explored using a link for "add constraints" but I have some concern with navigating the user away (without either saving or canceling) unless we either:
A) return to the pop-over making Constraint selections.
B) offer some time of indication to the user that they are progressing and moving away.
* I believe the checkbox and "Next" button offer this notification, and due to that there is no need to return to the pop-over unless the user cancels the action.
^^ This also my general concern with the Manage link in the pop-over. In that case, I feel that we should offer a notification to the user that they will be leaving this screen and navigating to another tab.
> Data type constraints: DMN canvas view workflow
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DROOLS-3481
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/DROOLS-3481
> Project: Drools
> Issue Type: Story
> Components: DMN Editor
> Reporter: Liz Clayton
> Assignee: Liz Clayton
> Priority: Major
> Labels: UX, UXTeam, drools-tools
>
> Background
> Persona: Business analyst or Rules practitioner
> Use Cases:
> * From the DMN canvas view:
> As a user, I want to be able to set data type constraints for an input value in a Decision Table, so that this constraint is valid _*only*_ in the context of this specific input in this Decision Table.
> * Provide options for:
> - one-off constraints
> - apply constraints to data type.
> - possibly "yoke" constraints to data type.
> Functional considerations/ pre conditions:
> * Consider interaction in light of Property panel and consistency.
> * Underscore the notion of one-off constraints.
> * Maintain "Manage" link.
> Verification conditions:
> * Scrum team and PO review.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.12.1#712002)
5 years, 10 months
[JBoss JIRA] (WFLY-11406) Reflection exception at org.jboss.classfilewriter.ClassFile on JDK12
by Matej Novotny (Jira)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-11406?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin... ]
Matej Novotny commented on WFLY-11406:
--------------------------------------
On Weld side, we would like to design an SPI that will leverage David's API coming from jboss-modules (albeit we might need an adjustment there), I started playing around with that.
However, this needs to addressed in jboss-classfilewriter firstly as everything using it will simply blow up from the static initializer there.
Should we use simple {{setAccessible()}}, it will work but we'll be getting all those lovely Illegal access warnings again (which was why we used unsafe).
Sadly, I don't really know how to bypass the new Unsafe limitations (aka how to do what they did with byte-buddy).
bq. Perhaps MethodHandles.Lookup.defineClass could work for this too but it may not and in any case is only available from JDK 9 on.
That is the supposed replacement, yet last time I checked it didn't allow to define classes with (different) {{ProtectionDomain}} which was a showstopper, at least for Weld.
Back there I created a JDK issue but got no answer.
> Reflection exception at org.jboss.classfilewriter.ClassFile on JDK12
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WFLY-11406
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-11406
> Project: WildFly
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: CDI / Weld, EJB
> Reporter: Richard Opalka
> Assignee: Matej Novotny
> Priority: Critical
> Labels: jdk12
> Fix For: 16.0.0.Beta1
>
>
> When running WildFly on JDK12 I'm observing this exception due to Unsafe changes in recent JDK Early Access builds:
> [0m[31m16:47:17,739 ERROR [org.jboss.msc.service.fail] (MSC service thread 1-6) MSC000001: Failed to start service jboss.deployment.unit."ws-endpoint-example.war".IN
> <------>at org.jboss.as.server@7.0.0.CR1-SNAPSHOT//org.jboss.as.server.deployment.DeploymentUnitPhaseService.start(DeploymentUnitPhaseService.java:151)
> <------>at org.jboss.msc@1.4.5.Final//org.jboss.msc.service.ServiceControllerImpl$StartTask.startService(ServiceControllerImpl.java:1738)
> <------>at org.jboss.msc@1.4.5.Final//org.jboss.msc.service.ServiceControllerImpl$StartTask.execute(ServiceControllerImpl.java:1700)
> <------>at org.jboss.msc@1.4.5.Final//org.jboss.msc.service.ServiceControllerImpl$ControllerTask.run(ServiceControllerImpl.java:1558)
> <------>at org.jboss.threads@2.3.2.Final//org.jboss.threads.ContextClassLoaderSavingRunnable.run(ContextClassLoaderSavingRunnable.java:35)
> <------>at org.jboss.threads@2.3.2.Final//org.jboss.threads.EnhancedQueueExecutor.safeRun(EnhancedQueueExecutor.java:1985)
> <------>at org.jboss.threads@2.3.2.Final//org.jboss.threads.EnhancedQueueExecutor$ThreadBody.doRunTask(EnhancedQueueExecutor.java:1487)
> <------>at org.jboss.threads@2.3.2.Final//org.jboss.threads.EnhancedQueueExecutor$ThreadBody.run(EnhancedQueueExecutor.java:1378)
> <------>at java.base/java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:835)
> Caused by: org.jboss.as.server.deployment.DeploymentUnitProcessingException: WFLYEE0024: Could not configure component TestService
> <------>at org.jboss.as.ee@15.0.0.CR1-SNAPSHOT//org.jboss.as.ee.component.deployers.EEModuleConfigurationProcessor.deploy(EEModuleConfigurationProcessor.java:106)
> <------>at org.jboss.as.server@7.0.0.CR1-SNAPSHOT//org.jboss.as.server.deployment.DeploymentUnitPhaseService.start(DeploymentUnitPhaseService.java:144)
> <------>... 8 more
> Caused by: java.lang.Error: java.lang.NoSuchFieldException: override
> <------>at org.jboss.classfilewriter@1.2.3.Final//org.jboss.classfilewriter.ClassFile$1.run(ClassFile.java:394)
> <------>at org.jboss.classfilewriter@1.2.3.Final//org.jboss.classfilewriter.ClassFile$1.run(ClassFile.java:385)
> <------>at java.base/java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(AccessController.java:551)
> <------>at org.jboss.classfilewriter(a)1.2.3.Final//org.jboss.classfilewriter.ClassFile.<clinit>(ClassFile.java:385)
> <------>at org.jboss.invocation(a)1.5.1.Final//org.jboss.invocation.proxy.AbstractClassFactory.<init>(AbstractClassFactory.java:97)
> <------>at org.jboss.invocation(a)1.5.1.Final//org.jboss.invocation.proxy.AbstractSubclassFactory.<init>(AbstractSubclassFactory.java:87)
> <------>at org.jboss.invocation(a)1.5.1.Final//org.jboss.invocation.proxy.AbstractProxyFactory.<init>(AbstractProxyFactory.java:69)
> <------>at org.jboss.invocation(a)1.5.1.Final//org.jboss.invocation.proxy.ProxyFactory.<init>(ProxyFactory.java:256)
> <------>at org.jboss.as.ee@15.0.0.CR1-SNAPSHOT//org.jboss.as.ee.component.DefaultComponentViewConfigurator.configure(DefaultComponentViewConfigurator.java:86)
> <------>at org.jboss.as.ee@15.0.0.CR1-SNAPSHOT//org.jboss.as.ee.component.deployers.EEModuleConfigurationProcessor.deploy(EEModuleConfigurationProcessor.java:92)
> <------>... 9 more
> Caused by: java.lang.NoSuchFieldException: override
> <------>at java.base/java.lang.Class.getDeclaredField(Class.java:2410)
> <------>at org.jboss.classfilewriter@1.2.3.Final//org.jboss.classfilewriter.ClassFile$1.run(ClassFile.java:392)
> <------>... 18 more
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.12.1#712002)
5 years, 10 months
[JBoss JIRA] (DROOLS-3499) Allow both prefixed and infixed AND in nested accumulates
by Mario Fusco (Jira)
Mario Fusco created DROOLS-3499:
-----------------------------------
Summary: Allow both prefixed and infixed AND in nested accumulates
Key: DROOLS-3499
URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/DROOLS-3499
Project: Drools
Issue Type: Feature Request
Components: core engine
Reporter: Mario Fusco
Assignee: Mario Fusco
At the moment drools can compile composite condition in a nested accumulate only using a prefixed 'and' like in
{code}
String($l: length)
accumulate(
(and
Integer(this == $l)
accumulate(
Long()
;$counter: count(1);$counter <= 4)
)
;$mainCounter: count(1);$mCounter <= 2
)
{code}
while it fails when using the infixed notation like in:
{code}
String($l: length)
accumulate(
(
Integer(this == $l) and
accumulate(
Long()
;$counter: count(1);$counter <= 4)
)
;$mainCounter: count(1);$mCounter <= 2
)
{code}
It is required that this could work also with the infix AND also because this is notation used by the DRLDumper when regenerating the drl from a PackageDescr
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.12.1#712002)
5 years, 10 months