+1
I fully agree and (mostly mentioned in EE7 EG discussions) faced problems in a large project where JPA 2 was introduced together with Spring, JMS and other Enterprise technologies in a WLS container...
Werner
-------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Datum: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 09:33:21 -0400
> Von: Scott Marlow <smarlow_at_redhat.com>
> An: jsr338-experts_at_jpa-spec.java.net
> Betreff: [jsr338-experts] improve how persistence providers learn of the JTA transaction manager to be used...
> Recently, I have been spending a lot of time on the JBoss AS JPA
> container and its integration with persistence providers using the JPA
> SPIs. I think we have some low hanging fruit to be had, in
> standardizing how the persistence providers obtain a JTA transaction
> manager.
>
> I've looked at (mostly four) different persistence providers and how
> they have application server vendor (often version) specific integration
> for obtaining either the JTA TransactionManager or
> TransactionSynchronizationRegistry.
>
> To improve how persistence providers integrate with containers, I think
> we should introduce properties for the container to pass a TM/TSR
> reference to the provider. This will help reduce the amount of
> application server vendor specific code, needed by the different
> persistence providers.
>
> Perhaps the properties could be:
>
> javax.persistence.transactionmanager - JNDI name of JTA Transaction
> Manager or instance of JTA Transaction Manager
>
> javax.persistence.transactionsynchronization - JNDI name of
> TransactionSynchronizationRegistry or instance of
> TransactionSynchronizationRegistry.
>
> The idea being that providers should expect either a TM/TSR to be passed
> directly or to use a JNDI lookup name (so providers could work with EE
> servers that don't have a single TSR/TM to pass in but perhaps have
> several instances to choose from).
>
> What do you think?
>
> Scott
--
Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir
belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de