Thanks - that sounds good and clears that one up.
Regards,
Ian
----- Forwarded by Ian Robinson/UK/IBM on 19/03/2013 20:28 -----
From: Pete Muir <pmuir_at_redhat.com>
To: Ian Robinson/UK/IBM_at_IBMGB,
Cc: Joseph Bergmark <bergmark_at_us.ibm.com>, users_at_jta-spec.java.net
Date: 19/03/2013 10:58
Subject: Re: "clarify a potential conflict between JTA and CDI"
If the non-contexutal instance is created using Unmanaged.produce() then
the interceptors will be applied, if the instance is created externally,
and then injected using Unmanaged.inject() then the interceptor won't be
applied. This is what I will spec :-)
On 18 Mar 2013, at 22:29, Ian Robinson <ian_robinson_at_uk.ibm.com> wrote:
> Adding onto the JTA list since we need this issue clarified as part of
the discussion on the closing the JTA 1.2 MR.
> I'm equally interested in the discussion around the question Joe asks
about *how* interceptors are supposed to be involved in non-contextual
references.
>
> Regards,
> Ian
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Pete Muir <pmuir_at_redhat.com>
> To: Joseph Bergmark <bergmark_at_us.ibm.com>,
> Cc: Ian Robinson/UK/IBM_at_IBMGB
> Date: 18/03/2013 15:20
> Subject: Re: "clarify a potential conflict between JTA and CDI"
>
>
>
> Thanks Joe.
>
> On 18 Mar 2013, at 13:21, Joseph Bergmark <bergmark_at_us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > I've opened: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-355
> >
> > To be honest I always through this was working as designed, and in
fact I've even quoted it to customers a few times. If CDI isn't given an
opportunity to participate in the creation of the instance (i.e. non
contextual instance), how would the container have a hook point to be able
to run interceptors when methods are called on that instance?
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Joe Bergmark
> > WebSphere Development
> > bergmark_at_us.ibm.com
> > (919)254-9925
> >
> >
> > From: Pete Muir <pmuir_at_redhat.com>
> > To: Joseph Bergmark/Durham/IBM_at_IBMUS,
> > Cc: Ian Robinson <ian_robinson_at_uk.ibm.com>
> > Date: 03/18/2013 08:15 AM
> > Subject: Re: "clarify a potential conflict between JTA
and CDI"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 18 Mar 2013, at 12:13, Joseph Bergmark <bergmark_at_us.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > > What specifically do you think is the bug so I can make sure I file
it clearly? That interceptors and decorators only apply to contextual
references
> >
> > This :-)
> >
> >
> > > or EJBs?
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > >
> > > Joe Bergmark
> > > WebSphere Development
> > > bergmark_at_us.ibm.com
> > > (919)254-9925
> > >
> > >
> > > From: Pete Muir <pmuir_at_redhat.com>
> > > To: Paul Parkinson <paul.parkinson_at_oracle.com>,
> > > Cc: users_at_jta-spec.java.net, JJ Snyder
<J.J.SNYDER_at_oracle.com>, Linda DeMichiel <linda.demichiel_at_oracle.com>,
Kevin Sutter/Rochester/IBM_at_IBMUS, Joseph Bergmark/Durham/IBM_at_IBMUS, Ian
Robinson <ian_robinson_at_uk.ibm.com>
> > > Date: 03/18/2013 07:32 AM
> > > Subject: Re: "clarify a potential conflict between
JTA and CDI"
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Ian, this is a bug in CDI, could you or Joe file a CDI issue in
http://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI and set the Fix Version to 1.1.FD, so
that I can address it!
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > On 15 Mar 2013, at 23:05, Paul Parkinson <paul.parkinson_at_oracle.com>
wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello JJ and Pete,
> > > >
> > > > As you know we have two new JTA annotations (Transactional and
TransactionScoped) in JTA1.2 that provide support in CDI.
> > > > The current JTA 1.2 spec/MR describing these can be found here:
http://java.net/projects/jta-spec/sources/spec-source-repository/content/JTA1.2Specification.pdf?rev=6
> > > >
> > > > Could I ask your help to resolve/clarify Ian's question below?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Paul
> > > >
> > > > On Mar 14, 2013, at 2:43 PM, Ian Robinson wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >> - I believe we need to additionally clarify a potential conflict
between JTA and CDI: servlets, JAX-RS resource classes, and JAX-WS service
endpoints are created by their containers with non-contextual references
(according to the platform specification EE 5.24 and in our
implementation) but the CDI spec (section 7.2) precludes bean with
non-contextual references from being intercepted:
> > > >>
> > > >> 7.2. Container invocations and interception
> > > >> When the application invokes:
> > > >> ? a method of a bean via a contextual reference to the bean, as
defined in Section 6.5.3, ?Contextual reference for a
> > > >> bean?, or
> > > >> ? a business method of a session bean via an EJB remote or local
reference,
> > > >> the invocation is treated as a business method invocation.
> > > >>
> > > >> --snip--
> > > >>
> > > >> If, and only if, an invocation is a business method invocation:
> > > >> ? it passes through method interceptors and decorators, and
> > > >> ? in the case of a session bean, it is subject to EJB services
such as declarative transaction management, concurrency, se-
> > > >> curity and asynchronicity, as defined by the EJB
specification.
> > > >> Otherwise, the invocation is treated as a normal Java method call
and is not intercepted by the container.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> It seems like CDI 7.2 needs to extend the scope of "business
method of a session bean via an EJB remote or local reference" to include
@Transactional beans with non-contextual references. Can you confirm
whether this interpretation is correct and, if so, how the CDI spec could
be changed to be consistent?
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU