[jboss-dev-forums] [JBoss Transactions Development] - Re: Remote txinflow: XID changes

Tom Jenkinson do-not-reply at jboss.com
Mon Oct 24 13:21:13 EDT 2011


Tom Jenkinson [http://community.jboss.org/people/tomjenkinson] created the discussion

"Re: Remote txinflow: XID changes"

To view the discussion, visit: http://community.jboss.org/message/633347#633347

--------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Mike,

Hopefully my previous answer helps to clarify some of the motivations for the current writes. It should also be pointed out that I don't mandate how this data is persisted, indeed potentially there are some items that the transport must store which can be persisted using TS optimised logging mechanisms, that is left to the transport to determine.

Thinking about your suggestion, one example where TS logging could possibly help to optimize this is the dynamic subordinate node identifier. As this Xid is for one of our own transactions, potentially David could provide his own XidImple implementation which packs the static subordinate node and its parents node identifier name after the bqual (which would be String node identifier instead of using a transport allocated dynamic int as I was describing earlier) in as an extra attributes to be persisted. Although it is likely that doing so would require work throughout the code base to ensure it was feasible to allow. Also, for example, I assume the JDBC action store assumes a schema that can take a BLOB(128) for the data part of an XidImple we would therefore need to determine which objectstores this would work with.
NOTE: This is a sponateous response to your point, I am not entirely certain it would work!

If you didn't go down that route (or it is proved not to work) then the issue you have is the transport needs to persist items at a different time to that which the transaction service current does. As Jonathan has pointed out, the transaction service is heavily optimized in this regard and with the particular set of requirements in hand, it seems that we have to add a few of these persistence points back (well the transport adds them, specific for this feature).

I will think more about providing a bespoke XidImple that packs in more data than a Xid typically allows - thanks for the suggestion  :)
--------------------------------------------------------------

Reply to this message by going to Community
[http://community.jboss.org/message/633347#633347]

Start a new discussion in JBoss Transactions Development at Community
[http://community.jboss.org/choose-container!input.jspa?contentType=1&containerType=14&container=2041]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jboss-dev-forums/attachments/20111024/9a1086b7/attachment.html 


More information about the jboss-dev-forums mailing list