For me a JMS Provider is a resource in Transaction terms, hence the
JMS Provider should always be used on the TM, not the opposite.
That is a bit different on the resource adapter though. Where you need
to inject a transaction manager for a series of operations, but that
only affects the implementation. I don't see any API changes required
here.
Also: There's however a definition somewhere on the JEE spec about the
TM being available on the Naming Context (somewhere I don't remember
now). But I think there are inconsistencies among the vendors what
sometimes causes issues for JMS RA implementors (Say If I'm using
HornetQ's RA on Glassfish).. but that's another issue. At least I
think the specs are already covering this.
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Nigel Deakin <nigel.deakin_at_oracle.com> wrote:
> I logged this issue
> http://java.net/jira/browse/JMS_SPEC-28
> as a placeholder to capture this comment from Adrian and Sivajee:
>
> "In our experience the 1.1 Spec is not very clear when it comes to
> interactions with Transaction Managers. In particular, what are the
> responsibilities of the JMS Provider, the TM and the App Server during
> recovery."
>
> Adrian/Shivajee: could you perhaps start off the discussion of this topic by
> describing in more detail what you think is inadequate, and what you think
> is needed?
>
> Also, I note that you don't mention "resource adapter". Is that significant?
> I think that has a role here (including in recovery).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nigel
>
>
>
--
Clebert Suconic
http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com