Nathan,
Thanks!
Regarding ContextService.USE_PARENT_TRANSACTION, I am planning to
rewrite the sentence to:
" This property will be ignored when the proxy object is submitted for
execution asynchronously on a different thread, such as if it is
specified in the execution properties of a ManagedTask which is
submitted to an Executor or any of its subclasses."
I will make the other changes as suggested.
Regards
Anthony
On 12/18/12 6:43 PM, Nathan Rauh wrote:
> Anthony,
>
> This looks really good. Thanks for writing it all up.
>
> I noticed a couple of minor things (mostly just typos)
>
>
> This example in ManagedExecutors has a typo
> Runnable taskWithListener = ManagedExecutors.managedTask(task,
> myTaskListener);
> executor.submit(*task*);
> It should be:
> Runnable taskWithListener = ManagedExecutors.managedTask(task,
> myTaskListener);
> executor.submit(*taskWithListener*);
>
>
> In ContextService.createContextObject, there's a typo,
> "If the application component that created the proxy *is started or
> deployed*, all methods on reflected interfaces will throw a
> java.lang.IllegalStateException."
> It should be:
> "If the application component that created the proxy *is not started
> or deployed*, all methods on reflected interfaces will throw a
> java.lang.IllegalStateException."
>
>
> In ContextService.USE_PARENT_TRANSACTION it currently reads:
> "This property will be ignored when the proxy object is submitted to
> an Executor..."
> Contextual proxy objects typically can't be submitted to an Executor,
> I think you meant:
> "This property will be ignored if specified on a ManagedTask that is
> submitted to an Executor..."
>
>
> After seeing this in several places,
> "ClassCastException - - thrown if one of the keys or values in the
> specified Properties object are not of type String."
> I wonder if we could better enforce this by just switching the type
> from java.util.Properties to java.util.HashMap<String, String>? I
> think we might have considered that before and didn't see any reason
> to switch it, but this extra type checking/validation now seems like a
> pretty good reason, since <String,String> will force the user to write
> it correctly to begin with.
>
>
> In ManagedTask.CONTEXTUAL_CALLBACK, the text currently includes:
> "If this property is not specified, container context will not be
> propagated to the threads that invoke the callback methods on the
> ManagedTaskListener."
> I think we should remove this statement, in which case if not
> specified, the behavior can be implementation specific such that the
> container is free to do whatever is most optimal - not having to
> remove context if already there, and not having to add context if not
> present. By deciding not to specify the property, the user is saying
> that their implementation doesn't care one way or the other about
> context being available to these listener notifications, and so the
> container can do whatever is most convenient.
>
>
>
> Nathan Rauh
> ____________________________________________
> Software Engineer, WebSphere Application Server
> IBM Rochester Bldg 002-2 C111
> 3605 Highway 52N
> Rochester, MN 55901-7802
>
>
>
> From: Anthony Lai <anthony.lai_at_oracle.com>
> To: jsr236-experts_at_concurrency-ee-spec.java.net
> Date: 12/18/2012 05:53 PM
> Subject: [jsr236-experts] Re: On ManagedTaskListener related APIs in
> MES and MSES
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Thanks, Nathan!
>
> I have update the javadoc at
> _http://concurrency-ee-spec.java.net/javadoc/_to capture what we have
> discussed so far. I have also included some minor corrections in this
> update. Classes that were updated includes:
>
> ContextService
> LastExecution
> ManagedExecutorService
> ManagedExecutors
> ManagedScheduledExecutorService
> ManagedTask (replacing Identifiable)
> SkippedException
>
> Regards
> Anthony
>
>
>
> On 12/18/12 12:25 PM, Nathan Rauh wrote:
> I agree - affinity only makes sense at the level of the
> ManagedExecutorService.
> At the per-task level, DISTRIBUTABLE=true/false as you suggested is good.
>
> Nathan Rauh
> ____________________________________________
> Software Engineer, WebSphere Application Server
> IBM Rochester Bldg 002-2 C111
> 3605 Highway 52N
> Rochester, MN 55901-7802
>
>
>
> From: Anthony Lai _<anthony.lai_at_oracle.com>_
> <mailto:anthony.lai_at_oracle.com>
> To: _jsr236-experts_at_concurrency-ee-spec.java.net_
> <mailto:jsr236-experts_at_concurrency-ee-spec.java.net>
> Date: 12/18/2012 12:02 PM
> Subject: [jsr236-experts] Re: On ManagedTaskListener related APIs in
> MES and MSES
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Thanks for pointing that out. :-)
>
> I was looking at this execution property and was wondering if
> DISTRIBUTABLE_WITH_AFFINITY hint applies to a single task. It applies to
> a MES or MSES so tasks submitted to the MES or MSES would be routed to
> the same application server process. But what does it mean on a task?
> Should a task simply provide hint saying whether it can be run in a
> remote process. So instead of having:
>
> Property name: RUN_LOCATION
> Possible values: LOCAL, DISTRIBUTABLE, DISTRIBUTABLE_WITH_AFFINITY
>
> Does it make sense to have this instead:
>
> Property name: DISTRIBUTABLE
> Possible values: "true", "false"
>
> Regards
> Anthony
>
> On 12/18/12 7:25 AM, _frowe_at_us.ibm.com_ <mailto:frowe_at_us.ibm.com>wrote:
> > I'm assuming that you'll correct the typo in
> > "DISRTIBUTABLE_WITH_AFFINITY
> > " when updating spec...
>
>
>