Re: [weld-dev] persistence and transactions outside Java EE
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Gavin King <gavin.king(a)gmail.com> wrote:
But that's where I think you're getting mixed up. JTA is not
part of
EJB. @TransactionAttribute is part of EJB. And there's no reason you
can't use JTA for local transactions. So I don't understand what's
wrong with the idea of Tomcat+Weld+Hibernate+JBoss Transactions + some
kind of pooling. We don't need a new kind of bean or a new kind of
container transaction. All we need is for @TransactionAttribute or
equivalent to work for something that is not an EJB.
Right, but the last time I checked, getting JTA transactions to work in
Tomcat or Jetty was a nightmare. And even when they loaded properly, they
didn't actually work (rollbacks failed). So basically, what I'm trying to
resolve is what exactly we are providing by emulating Java EE transactions
and persistence. I'm just confused where Java EE falls apart that we feel we
need to still provide this. Isn't this the whole idea of EJB lite? And so I
ask, why can't we have Java EE lite which supports @TransactionAttribute
without having something that is an EJB, yet still stay inside of Java EE?
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
Attachments:
- attachment.html (text/html — 1.8 KB)