Hello,
Please provide feedback on the assignment of a priority value for the transaction interceptor(s that provides the functionality behind the new Transactional annotation).
This is analogous to the "0" value in/of OTS ;) and the current proposal is to use Interceptor.Priority.PLATFORM_BEFORE+200 (see below).
Again as we are running very short on time prompt feedback is greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Paul
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Linda DeMichiel <linda.demichiel_at_oracle.com>
> Subject: Priority of interceptors
> Date: January 31, 2013 2:22:18 PM EST
> To: jsr342-experts_at_javaee-spec.java.net, Emmanuel Bernard <ebernard_at_redhat.com>, Paul Parkinson <paul.parkinson_at_oracle.com>
>
>
> The revisions to the Interceptor spec to accommodate the improved
> managed bean alignment are nearly complete. You can download the
> current draft of the spec from the interceptor-spec.java.net project
> at http://java.net/projects/interceptors-spec/downloads
>
> One of the issues that we still need to resolve, however, is the
> assignment of priorities to the new transactional interceptors being
> defined by JTA and the Bean Validation interceptors that handle
> method validation.
>
> Section 5.5 of the Interceptors spec defines the following Priority
> values (see the spec for the details):
>
> Interceptor.Priority.PLATFORM_BEFORE = 0
> Interceptor.Priority.LIBRARY_BEFORE = 1000
> Interceptor.Priority.APPLICATION = 2000
> Interceptor.Priority.LIBRARY_AFTER = 3000
> Interceptor.Priority.PLATFORM_AFTER = 4000
>
> In our earlier discussions, we concluded that transactional
> interceptors needed to come relatively early in the interceptor chain.
> To put a stake in the ground, we propose that we define these to have
> a priority of Interceptor.Priority.PLATFORM_BEFORE+200.
>
> Validation interceptors, however, should come relatively late,
> since they will ensure that the parameters that reach the method
> (which might have been modified by other interceptors) are valid.
> Again, to put a stake in the ground, we'll propose a priority of
> Interceptor.Priority.PLATFORM_AFTER+1000.
>
> Comments please!
>
> Emmanuel, Paul, could you please consult with your expert groups
> for further input as well...
>
> thanks,
>
> -Linda
>
>
>