Issue 3362: transaction versus transaction context (ots-rtf) Source: UBS (Mr. Hans Kneubuehl, hans.kneubuehl(at)ubs.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: The OTS spec makes a difference between transaction and transaction context: Roughly: transaction - an ACID unit of work transaction context - information about a transaction associated with a thread My understanding is that the OTS then also makes this distinction for propagation, and I think this is where we disagree: i) transaction propagation ii) transaction context propagation My understanding is that i) explicit and implicit transaction propagation refer to the application level: whether or not transactional behavior is specified in the operation signature ii) transaction context propagation refers to the ORB level Thus the application can choose how it wants to control whether the transaction is propagated. That's i). But once it is decided that a transaction has to be propagated, the question is by what mechanism at the ORB level. That's ii). Your understanding is that you can have only explicit or implicit and it refers to both levels, right? Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: February 25, 2000: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== From: hans.kneubuehl@ubs.com X-OpenMail-Hops: 2 Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 17:52:15 +0100 Message-Id: Subject: transaction versus transaction context MIME-Version: 1.0 TO: M.C.Little@ncl.ac.uk, ots-rtf@omg.org Content-Disposition: inline; filename="BDY.TXT" ;Creation-Date="Fri, 25 Feb 2000 17:52:15 +0100" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII ;Creation-Date="Fri, 25 Feb 2000 17:52:15 +0100" X-UIDL: l7Ne9m_\!!DK5e9(!\!! Mark, I think I have identified some fundamental point where we disagree. We should first try to get this one clear. The OTS spec makes a difference between transaction and transaction context: Roughly: transaction - an ACID unit of work transaction context - information about a transaction associated with a thread My understanding is that the OTS then also makes this distinction for propagation, and I think this is where we disagree: i) transaction propagation ii) transaction context propagation My understanding is that i) explicit and implicit transaction propagation refer to the application level: whether or not transactional behavior is specified in the operation signature ii) transaction context propagation refers to the ORB level Thus the application can choose how it wants to control whether the transaction is propagated. That's i). But once it is decided that a transaction has to be propagated, the question is by what mechanism at the ORB level. That's ii). Your understanding is that you can have only explicit or implicit and it refers to both levels, right? Regards Hans -- Hans Kneubuehl, UBS AG, P.O. Box, 8098 Zurich, Switzerland phone: +41 1 238 28 96, fax: +41 1 238 30 11 Reply-To: From: "Eric Newcomer" To: , , Subject: RE: transaction versus transaction context Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 12:16:43 -0500 Message-ID: <000d01bf7fb4$17794e90$a003020a@dublin.iona.ie> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-UIDL: JG7e9MYb!!28kd9-4Fe9 One thing to add - transaction context normally should be erased or discarded as soon as the transaction ends, which is either when someone first signals a rollback, or the two-phase commit protocol reaches successful conclusion. Because transaction context is only meaningful during the execution of a transaction, these two can be closely tied in the spec. -----Original Message----- From: hans.kneubuehl@ubs.com [mailto:hans.kneubuehl@ubs.com] Sent: Friday, February 25, 2000 11:52 AM To: M.C.Little@ncl.ac.uk; ots-rtf@omg.org Subject: transaction versus transaction context Mark, I think I have identified some fundamental point where we disagree. We should first try to get this one clear. The OTS spec makes a difference between transaction and transaction context: Roughly: transaction - an ACID unit of work transaction context - information about a transaction associated with a thread My understanding is that the OTS then also makes this distinction for propagation, and I think this is where we disagree: i) transaction propagation ii) transaction context propagation My understanding is that i) explicit and implicit transaction propagation refer to the application level: whether or not transactional behavior is specified in the operation signature ii) transaction context propagation refers to the ORB level Thus the application can choose how it wants to control whether the transaction is propagated. That's i). But once it is decided that a transaction has to be propagated, the question is by what mechanism at the ORB level. That's ii). Your understanding is that you can have only explicit or implicit and it refers to both levels, right? Regards Hans -- Hans Kneubuehl, UBS AG, P.O. Box, 8098 Zurich, Switzerland phone: +41 1 238 28 96, fax: +41 1 238 30 11