Hello
I'm happy with these as the top priorities.
I'd like the commit priority specification to enable users to precisely
prioritise the ordering of an arbitrary number of resources. It should be
possible for different applications to use the same resources with
different priorities.
The addition of timeout to @Transactional seems uncontroversial. Has there
been any call for adding a properties parameter to UT.begin() or was that
just proposed for symmetry?
Thanks
Jon
From: Paul Parkinson <paul.parkinson_at_oracle.com>
To: users_at_jta-spec.java.net
Date: 12/05/2016 17:19
Subject: [jta-spec users] shall we crack on? :) ...
Hello,
So in our list of items we have these two priorities:
-
https://java.net/jira/browse/JTA_SPEC-4 "support explicit ordering of
commits for XAResources enlisted in a transaction” .
There has been consensus for a while now that this is the
top priority issue and we’d been discussing the best way to make it
configurable (eg IBM WebSphere uses resource-ref config, Redhat WildFly
uses XAResource interface extension, etc.), therefore, I think the next
step here is to resolve that aspect.
-
https://java.net/jira/browse/JTA_SPEC-13 "Add timeout attribute to the
javax.transaction.Transactional annotation” .
This is related to a topic that we’ve discussed here
since before this annotation which is standardizing the ability to pass
transaction properties (such as timeout) at an individual transaction
level. Again here we have options such as a new UT/TM.begin API that takes
either the transaction timeout or properties or both, the attribute of the
CDI Transactional annotation as mentioned in this entry, etc.
Thoughts?...
Thanks,
Paul
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