[weld-dev] persistence and transactions outside Java EE

[Dan Allen]

You are correct that for various reasons, many developers are fixated on
Tomcat and Jetty. However, I do believe that if there are embeddable Java EE
alternatives, such as Embedded JBoss AS, then the grip on servlet containers
will loosen.

What these developers want is to be able to deploy their app over top of
Maven (or whatever build tool offers this feature). They like the automatic
download of the server and the "in place" style deployment. I'm sure there
are some other features I'm overlooking, but in the end, it comes down to
zero configuration and overall simplicity. Having to boot up and application
server as a service is just not as appealing. But that isn't out of the
reach of Java EE.

-Dan

On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Gavin King <gavin.king at 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 at 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 at 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 at gmail.com
> >>>> http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
> >>>> http://hibernate.org
> >>>> http://seamframework.org
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> weld-dev mailing list
> >>>> weld-dev at 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 at gmail.com
> http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
> http://hibernate.org
> http://seamframework.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> weld-dev mailing list
> weld-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
>



-- 
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/weld-dev/attachments/20091124/88c47d80/attachment-0001.html