In the JSR 352 batch specification there are some issues around
transactions with JCA. These issues would mainly be seen with JDBC
item readers/writers.
Here is kind of a thought dump from a sit down I had with the JCA
team. If anyone has any opinions on how this should be handled let's
talk it out. I would imagine this is a fairly important issue as
generally speaking batch jobs will likely be legacy jobs and JDBC is
probably heavily used.
Batch Transactions with JCA
Problem:
Batch requires that a Transaction.begin() and a Transaction.commit()
for each open, close and chunk processed. This causes connections
from JCA to potentially cross transactional boundaries.
This requires that the JCA CachedConnectionManager (CCM) is
enabled for the resource in question (Jesper)
Transaction code should be written like:
Connection c
Transaction.begin()
c = DataSource.getConnection()
c.close()
Transaction.commit()
Chunk Processing process:
Transaction.begin()
ItemReader.open()
ItemWriter.open()
Transaction.commit()
repeat until item reader returns null
Transaction.begin()
repeat-on-chunk
ItemReader.readItem()
ItemProcessor.processItem()
ItemWriter.writeItems
Transaction.commit()
Transaction.begin()
ItemReader.close()
ItemWriter.close()
Transaction.commit()
Where seen:
- No errors in 8.1+
- Upstream with the tracking set to true and exception is
thrown;
/subsystem=datasources/data-source=ExampleDS:write-attribute(name=tracking,
value=true)
- https://gist.github.com/jamezp/cf39f92913425c83929f
- This shows where the connection was allocated that is
crossing the transaction boundary, and hence killed (Jesper)
Questions:
- Will the tracking attribute be used often?
- The feature is meant to allow people to find where in their
code they are making assumptions that isn't true (Jesper)
- The corner case is just the "c.close()" call (Jesper)
Possible Fixes:
- Leave batch as is. If the tracking attribute is set to true
exceptions will be thrown
- Remember that the underlying connection will be killed
(Jesper)
- Add a property to jBeret to use local (fake) transactions.
This is what we currently do and I feel it's just wrong.
- Create a deployment descriptor (or possibly a property that
can be passed when starting the job) to allow different styles
for transactions
Example JBoss Way
repeat until item reader returns null
Transaction.begin()
ItemReader.open()
ItemWriter.open()
repeat-on-chunk
ItemReader.readItem()
ItemProcessor.processItem()
ItemWriter.writeItems()
ItemReader.close()
ItemWriter.close()
Transaction.commit()
--
James R. Perkins
JBoss by Red Hat