4:56 p.m.
On 2/4/14, 9:57 AM, Stuart Douglas wrote:
I would use a transaction synchronization, so you don't spawn the
other thread until the transaction is successfully committed.
yes, we could implement it in wildfly-batch integration module.
What does the spec say about transactions? If a job is create in a
thread that is part of a transaction and the transaction is rolled
back should the job actually go ahead? Common sense would suggest not.
The
transaction treatment in the batch spec is mostly around item
processing, not much on how it interacts with the transaction in the
running environment. The only place that it touches on Java EE
environment is section 9.7 Transactionality:
Chunk type check points are transactional. The batch runtime uses global
transaction mode on the Java EE platform and local transaction mode on
the Java SE platform. Global transaction timeout is configurable at
step-level with a step-level property:
Yes, I agree if the batch client side transaction is rolled back, the
job execution should not proceed. With the current jberet impl, the job
execution in this case will fail since the job repository is not in good
state, like in the above bug. If we have transaction syncrhonization in
place, then the job will not start running till transaction 1 is committed.
Thanks,
Cheng
Stuart
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Cheng Fang <cfang(a)redhat.com
<mailto:cfang@redhat.com>> wrote:
A jberet user reported JBERET-29
<https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBERET-29> (Foreign key
constraint step_execution_jobexecutionid_fkey fails when using
Postgresql on WildFly, and we are trying to fix it by jberet
1.0.0.Final. The problem happens when user app starts a job
within a transaction (e.g., CMT EJB), jberet inserts JobExecution
into database (thread 1 & transaction 1), and then spawn a
jberet-batch thread to run the job (thead 2 & transaction 2).
Sometimes T2 tries to access db before T1 is committed, hence the
error reported by the user.
What's the common approach for solving this kind of problem? I
suppose other WildFly components may also have this issue and
probably already solved. Using transaction synchronization is a
cleaner solution than polling db, but I'm not sure about its full
implication. Ideally, I don't want to use system level JTA API
like TransactionManager or Synchronization in jberet proper, but
probably we can implement it in WildFly jberet integration.
Thanks,
Cheng
_______________________________________________
wildfly-dev mailing list
wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev