No one experienced this?
Below I posted the ContainerManagedConcurrencyInterceptor implementation which is invoked when a method from statefull beans is invoked.
public Object invoke(Invocation invocation) throws Throwable
{
Lock lock = getLock(invocation);
long time = DEFAULT_MAX_TIMEOUT_VALUE;
TimeUnit unit = DEFAULT_MAX_TIMEOUT_UNIT;
AccessTimeoutEffigy timeout = getAccessTimeout((MethodInvocation) invocation);
if (timeout != null)
{
if (timeout.getTimeout() < 0)
{
// for any negative value of timeout, we just default to max timeout val and max timeout unit.
// violation of spec! But we don't want to wait indefinitely.
logger.debug("Ignoring a negative @AccessTimeout value: " + timeout.getTimeout() + " and timeout unit: "
+ timeout.getUnit().name() + ". Will default to timeout value: " + DEFAULT_MAX_TIMEOUT_VALUE
+ " and timeout unit: " + DEFAULT_MAX_TIMEOUT_UNIT.name());
}
else
{
time = timeout.getTimeout();
unit = timeout.getUnit();
}
}
boolean success = lock.tryLock(time, unit);
if (!success)
{
throw new ConcurrentAccessTimeoutException("EJB 3.1 PFD2 4.8.5.5.1 concurrent access timeout on " + invocation
+ " - could not obtain lock within " + time + unit.name());
}
try
{
return invocation.invokeNext();
}
finally
{
lock.unlock();
}
}
The invocations on incrementNumber from GenericSFB are serialized at boolean success = lock.tryLock(time, unit);
It does not make sens to have mutual exclusion for statefull beans invocatins, as it looks to be implemented.