On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Gavin King <gavin.king@gmail.com> wrote:

Yes, I understand the need for XA enlistment, but JBoss Transactions
is already able to do that, right? What I'm saying is that you would
use the TransactionalDriver together with a pool. Or does
TransactionalDriver already do pooling?

Yes, I understand that this is primitive compared to JCA. But we're
dealing with the users who claim they don't want or need an
application server. They, for their own, mostly incomprehensible,
reasons, *want* to use Tomcat or Jetty or something without a JCA
layer, together with one of the very inferior pooling solutions that
are available in that environment. And they've been told for years by
the Spring crowd that it's a good idea and that they should keep doing
it.

Now, you and I both know this to be a total load of bunk, but we have
tried to argue with these people and it is futile. They read it in
books, so it must be true. We all know that a couple of years of
exposure to Spring turns good developers into drooling, brain-damaged
automatons who believe anything you tell them as long as you wave
around enough underspecified jargon like "lightweight" and remind them
how much EJB sucked 5 years ago.

Now, if you know of a good, reasonably easy to use standalone JCA
layer, I'm all ears, but AFAIK, there's nothing really available in
this space.

On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Jonathan Halliday
<jonathan.halliday@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> None of the pools is XA aware - they will pool standard connections, but not
> XA ones that need XAResource enlistment to the JTA tx. The
> TransactionalDriver in JBossTS will do that, but it's pretty primitive
> compared to a real JCA.
>
> Jonathan.
>
> On 11/23/2009 05:16 PM, Gavin King wrote:
>>
>> Ah. Standalone JCA is a problem. But do we really need JCA, or can we
>> just let Hibernate use one of the standalone connection pools that it
>> ships with?
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Pete Muir<pmuir@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I chatted to Jonathan about this, he tells me the binary for JBossTS JTA
>>> is under 1MB with no external dependencies other than the JTA API (but we
>>> would probably need standalone JCA too).
>>>
>>> On 18 Nov 2009, at 23:10, Gavin King wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think we should try and follow the Java EE models as closely as
>>>> possible for this stuff. We should simply try and make the Java EE
>>>> code work outside EE 6.
>>>>
>>>> e.g.
>>>>
>>>> (1) use a resource declaration with @PersistenceContext(unitName=....)
>>>> to define a managed persistence context
>>>> (2) use JBoss Transactions to manage transactions in a servlet engine
>>>> - so instead of having a special tx manager for JDBC, it is just JTA
>>>>
>>>> Or is the 10meg download for JBoss Transactions just no good?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Gavin King
>>>> gavin.king@gmail.com
>>>> http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
>>>> http://hibernate.org
>>>> http://seamframework.org
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> weld-dev mailing list
>>>> weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street,
> Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom.
> Registered in UK and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903
> Directors: Michael Cunningham (USA), Charlie Peters (USA), Matt Parsons
> (USA) and Brendan Lane (Ireland)
>

--

Gavin King
gavin.king@gmail.com
http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
http://hibernate.org
http://seamframework.org

_______________________________________________
weld-dev mailing list
weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev