[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBTM-2848?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin....
]
David Lloyd commented on JBTM-2848:
-----------------------------------
The JTA specification seems pretty clear on the point. Also in terms of best practices,
whether or not you can do the same operations doesn't typically have any bearing on
the equals/hashCode contract, generally speaking, so already it's a pretty unusual
case, the more so because hashCode does not discriminate by type; it's hard to imagine
any correctness issue that this behavior actually solves. If a user needs to discriminate
based purely on behavior or available operations, they would naturally examine the type
themselves using any number of common idioms as they would for any other type.
From the container code perspective, I probably can adjust to assume
that the implementation doesn't actually conform to specification in some places but
as long as Narayana is returning different types in different situations for the same XID,
at some point this is going to cause an issue because I've relied on this aspect of
the specification for quite a long time. If the importer always returns the same type for
a given XID then that's probably enough to conform to the specification (barring the
case where someone manually manufactures an invalid TransactionImple) and also makes my
problem go away; I just went for the solution that I see as more practical, correct, and
idiomatic.
Transaction .equals() methods do not comply with specification
--------------------------------------------------------------
Key: JBTM-2848
URL:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBTM-2848
Project: JBoss Transaction Manager
Issue Type: Bug
Components: JTA
Reporter: David Lloyd
Assignee: Ondra Chaloupka
Priority: Blocker
The JTA specification has this to say about Transaction.equals():
{quote}
The transaction manager must implement the Transaction object's {{equals}} method to
allow comparison between the target object and another Transaction object. The {{equals}}
method should return {{true}} if the target object and the parameter object both refer to
the same global transaction.
For example, the application server may need to compare two Transaction objects when
trying to reuse a resource that is already enlisted with a transaction. This can be done
using the {{equals}} method.
{code}
Transaction txObj = TransactionManager.getTransaction();
Transaction someOtherTxObj = ..
..
boolean isSame = txObj.equals(someOtherTxObj);
{code}
In addition, the transaction manager must implement the Transaction object's
{{hashCode}} method so that if two Transaction objects are equal, they have the same hash
code. However, the converse is not necessarily true. Two Transaction objects with the same
hash code are not necessarily equal.
{quote}
There are several transaction implementation classes in Narayana including:
*
{{com.arjuna.ats.internal.jta.transaction.arjunacore.subordinate.jca.TransactionImple}}
* {{com.arjuna.ats.internal.jta.transaction.arjunacore.subordinate.TransactionImple}}
* {{com.arjuna.ats.internal.jta.transaction.arjunacore.TransactionImple}}
Sometimes it comes to pass that, for whatever reason, importing a transaction might
return a transaction instance of a different type than what was previously returned. In
this case the flaw in the {{equals}} method is clear: it compares the types for effective
equality before it compares the UID, causing two transactions of different types which
refer to the same global transaction to be non-equal, which causes integrity checks in the
remote JTA code to fail.
I'll provide a PR that fixes the issue which you can use if you want.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.2.3#72005)