Win a copy of 97 Things Every Java Programmer Should Know this week in the Java in General forum!
  • Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
programming forums Java Mobile Certification Databases Caching Books Engineering Micro Controllers OS Languages Paradigms IDEs Build Tools Frameworks Application Servers Open Source This Site Careers Other all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
Marshals:
  • Campbell Ritchie
  • Paul Clapham
  • Jeanne Boyarsky
  • Junilu Lacar
  • Henry Wong
Sheriffs:
  • Ron McLeod
  • Devaka Cooray
  • Tim Cooke
Saloon Keepers:
  • Tim Moores
  • Stephan van Hulst
  • Frits Walraven
  • Tim Holloway
  • Carey Brown
Bartenders:
  • Piet Souris
  • salvin francis
  • fred rosenberger

Question on 18.4.2

 
Greenhorn
Posts: 9
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi,
I have a quesiton on the 3rd paragraph of section 18.4.2, which states "If the client executes in the context of a transaction, the clients transaction may, or may not, have been marked for rollback by the communication subsystem or target beans Container". This is in reference to a RemoteException or EJBException being thrown by a target bean.
My understanding is that if a system exception/error is thrown from a bean instance the transaction will always be marked for rollback? Is this section of the spec stating the opposite?

thanks,
Dean
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 37
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
The client transaction will not be rolled back if let say the ejb method invoked by container has transaction attribute = 'RequireNew' so container will rollback only the EJB transaction in case bean has thrown a Remote/EJB exception. (The original transaction was in suspend mode during the invokation of ejb method.)
On the contrary if the ejb method was set with transaction attribute = 'Requires', 'Supports', 'Mandatory' then container will rollback client transaction in case bean throws a Remote/EJB exception.
Hope this help.
Others, please correct my understanding.... its 11:46 PM here
 
author
Posts: 11962
5
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
"Padam K R",
I have to ask you to change your display name as it doesn't comply with our naming policy (initials are allowed only for first name, not last name).
Thanks.
 
Padam Krishna
Ranch Hand
Posts: 37
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Dear Lasse,
My last name is 'K R'. I don't want to put full of my last name since that's how I have use it.
In India you will find lot of people with Initials in there last name and so I thought I will be okay with having my name as I always use.

 
Lasse Koskela
author
Posts: 11962
5
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
"Padam K R",
I'm afraid you'll have to change your name regardless. It is explicitly mentioned in the naming policy that this firstname/lastname convention may not fit all cultures equally well but it also explains the reasons why we can't make exceptions.
I hope you dont' see this as being rude. We're only trying to withhold a professional image.
Thank you.
 
a wee bit from the empire
Devious Experiments for a Truly Passive Greenhouse!
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/paulwheaton/greenhouse-1
    Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic