posted 22 years ago
I can think of one instance when I considered BMT, but decided against it because I figured out a way to do it using CMT.
The only time that I considered it was in having to access 2 different databases inside of one transaction. I didn't have/or need 2 phase commit protocol because DB-1 was read only and DB 2 was to be updated. If you are inside of a transaction scope the container will not let you start another transaction with a different database. In this case it would have been good if I could have suspended one transaction and done a non-transactional call, etc.
I was able to accomplish what I wanted by calling the lookup on the other database through a session bean that didn't participate in transactions ... so, the container handled it for me.
BMT is potentially error prone because you can throw exceptions and go around your commit or rollback statements, etc. I've been using EJB for about 2 1/2 years and have never had the need for BMT.
Paul
Where Photography meets vision.<br /><a href="http://www.photogravision.com" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.photogravision.com</a><br />Please stop by!<br /> <br />SCJP,SCWCD,SCJD,SCEA