Thanks for your reply to my post.
WebSphere Application Server does not expose the javax.transaction.TransactionManager
interface to applications or application frameworks deployed into WebSphere Application
Specifically we've come to find that we cannot use the TransactionManager to:
* Suspend Transactions
* Register Transaction Synchronizations
Looking at the source code you referenced it appears the TransactionManager interface is
only being used to register a synchronization. Is there any other code you're aware
of that uses the EnvironmentName.TRANSACTION_MANAGER? If not this is good because
Websphere 7 supports JTA 1.1 which supports the TransactionSynchronizationRegistry. Is it
possible for us to provide an alternative implementation of the
SingleSessionCommandService? We would provide an implementation that uses the
TransactionSynchronizationRegistry instead of TransactionManager. If you could point us
in the right direction there that would be great. Otherwise perhaps we could just provide
a dummy TransactionManager implementation that delegates to the
TransactionSynchronizationRegistry? What do you think?
From: Mark Proctor [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:12 PM
To: Rules Users List
Cc: Allen Day
Subject: Re: [rules-users] JTA question
Kris Verlaenen wrote:
We selected JPA and JTA because they appear to be the standards for
persistence and transaction currently. When you say incompatible, do
you mean that the WebSphere transaction manager isn't JTA compliant,
that we are using JTA features that WebSphere does not support, or that
it is a custom transaction solution?
Note that persistence and transactions is defined as an orthogonal
concern, meaning you can easily replace it by another implementation
without having to redefine everything. I'm more than happy to work with
you on making this work on WebSphere. If you want to take a look at our
transaction implementation, take a look at SingleSessionCommandService:
As you can see, there are only a few calls to the transaction manager
before and after the execution of the commands (supporting both
user-defined or default transactions). Shouldn't be too difficult to
either replace that with another transaction implementation, or make the
solution more generic to support multiple ones altogether.
I can concur that the plan was always to support other transaction models, but to target
JTA first as it's an established standard. Beyond that we wanted to make sure our
direction was user driven.
Quoting Allen Day <DayAK@ldschurch.org><mailto:DayAK@ldschurch.org>:
I am new to this list, so I apologize if this question has been asked
It appears that drools-flow requires JTA in order to use JPA. Is
anybody using drools-flow running on WebSphere, because WebSphere
uses its' own transaction manager (and the two don't seem
compatible). Has anybody looked at the feature request to provide
support for resource local transactions -
We need to decide soon between Drools Flow & JBPM, and this issue
could swing in JBPM's favor.
rules-users mailing list
NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure
or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.