You can not select more than 25 topics
Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
2525 lines
121 KiB
2525 lines
121 KiB
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> |
|
<!DOCTYPE chapter PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DocBook XML V4.5//EN" |
|
"http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/xml/4.5/docbookx.dtd"> |
|
<chapter id="transaction"> |
|
<title>Transaction Management</title> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-intro"> |
|
<title>Introduction to Spring Framework transaction management</title> |
|
|
|
<para>Comprehensive transaction support is among the most compelling |
|
reasons to use the Spring Framework. The Spring Framework provides a |
|
consistent abstraction for transaction management that delivers the |
|
following benefits:</para> |
|
|
|
<itemizedlist> |
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Consistent programming model across different transaction APIs |
|
such as Java Transaction API (JTA), JDBC, Hibernate, Java Persistence |
|
API (JPA), and Java Data Objects (JDO).</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Support for <link linkend="transaction-declarative">declarative |
|
transaction management</link>.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Simpler API for <link |
|
linkend="transaction-programmatic">programmatic</link> transaction |
|
management than complex transaction APIs such as JTA.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Excellent integration with Spring's data access |
|
abstractions.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
</itemizedlist> |
|
|
|
<para>The following sections describe the Spring Framework's transaction |
|
value-adds and technologies. (The chapter also includes discussions of |
|
best practices, application server integration, and solutions to common |
|
problems.)</para> |
|
|
|
<itemizedlist> |
|
<listitem> |
|
<para><link linkend="transaction-motivation">Advantages of the Spring |
|
Framework's transaction support model</link> describes |
|
<emphasis>why</emphasis> you would use the Spring Framework's |
|
transaction abstraction instead of EJB Container-Managed Transactions |
|
(CMT) or choosing to drive local transactions through a proprietary |
|
API such as Hibernate.</para> |
|
|
|
<!--The section (formerly called Motivation) does not mention Hibernate. It talks about local and global. TR: REVISED, PLS REVIEW added 'local' to the sentence--> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para><link linkend="transaction-strategies">Understanding the Spring |
|
Framework transaction abstraction</link> outlines the core classes and |
|
describes how to configure and obtain |
|
<interfacename>DataSource</interfacename> instances from a variety of |
|
sources.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para><link linkend="tx-resource-synchronization">Synchronizing |
|
resources with transactions </link>describes how the application code |
|
ensures that resources are created, reused, and cleaned up |
|
properly.<!--Added above link and bullet item. TR: OK--></para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para><link linkend="transaction-declarative">Declarative transaction |
|
management</link> describes support for declarative transaction |
|
management.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para><link linkend="transaction-programmatic">Programmatic |
|
transaction management</link> covers support for programmatic (that |
|
is, explicitly coded) transaction management.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
</itemizedlist> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-motivation"> |
|
<title>Advantages of the Spring Framework's transaction support model<!--Renamed section to make it more to the point. TR: OK--></title> |
|
|
|
<para>Traditionally, Java EE developers have had two choices for |
|
transaction management: <emphasis>global</emphasis> or |
|
<emphasis>local</emphasis> transactions, both of which have profound |
|
limitations. Global and local transaction management is reviewed in the |
|
next two sections, followed by a discussion of how the Spring Framework's |
|
transaction management support addresses the limitations of the global and |
|
local transaction models.</para> |
|
|
|
<!--Gave global, local, and spring models their own sections. These need to be called out at a higher level, esp. Spring advantage! TR: OK--> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-global"> |
|
<title>Global transactions</title> |
|
|
|
<para>Global transactions enable you to work with multiple transactional |
|
resources, typically relational databases and message queues. The |
|
application server manages global transactions through the JTA, which is |
|
a cumbersome API to use (partly due to its exception model). |
|
Furthermore, a JTA <interfacename>UserTransaction</interfacename> |
|
normally needs to be sourced from JNDI, meaning that you |
|
<emphasis>also</emphasis> need to use JNDI in order to use JTA. |
|
Obviously the use of global transactions would limit any potential reuse |
|
of application code, as JTA is normally only available in an application |
|
server environment.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>Previously, the preferred way to use global transactions was via |
|
EJB <emphasis>CMT</emphasis> (<emphasis>Container Managed |
|
Transaction</emphasis>): CMT is a form of <emphasis |
|
role="bold">declarative transaction management</emphasis> (as |
|
distinguished from <emphasis role="bold">programmatic transaction |
|
management</emphasis>). EJB CMT removes the need for transaction-related |
|
JNDI lookups, although of course the use of EJB itself necessitates the |
|
use of JNDI. It removes most but not all of the need to write Java code |
|
to control transactions. The significant downside is that CMT is tied to |
|
JTA and an application server environment. Also, it is only available if |
|
one chooses to implement business logic in EJBs, or at least behind a |
|
transactional EJB facade. The negatives of EJB in general are so great |
|
that this is not an attractive proposition, especially in the face of |
|
compelling alternatives for declarative transaction management.</para> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-local"> |
|
<title>Local transactions</title> |
|
|
|
<para>Local transactions are resource-specific, such as a transaction |
|
associated with a JDBC connection. Local transactions may be easier to |
|
use, but have significant disadvantages: they cannot work across |
|
multiple transactional resources. For example, code that manages |
|
transactions using a JDBC connection cannot run within a global JTA |
|
transaction. Because the application server is not involved in |
|
transaction management, it cannot help ensure correctness across |
|
multiple resources. (It is worth noting that most applications use a |
|
single transaction resource.) Another downside is that local |
|
transactions are invasive to the programming model.</para> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-programming-model"> |
|
<title>Spring Framework's consistent programming model</title> |
|
|
|
<para>Spring resolves the disadvantages of global and local |
|
transactions. It enables application developers to use a |
|
<emphasis>consistent</emphasis> programming model <emphasis>in any |
|
environment</emphasis>. You write your code once, and it can benefit |
|
from different transaction management strategies in different |
|
environments. The Spring Framework provides both declarative and |
|
programmatic transaction management. Most users prefer declarative |
|
transaction management, which is recommended in most cases.</para> |
|
|
|
<!--Do you need to specify that Spring allows you to work with *multiple* transactional resourcess (as global transactions do)? TR: OK AS IS--> |
|
|
|
<para>With programmatic transaction management, developers work with the |
|
Spring Framework transaction abstraction, which can run over any |
|
underlying transaction infrastructure. <!--Re preceding statement, does this mean that next section re transaction abstraction applies only to programmatic tx management?If so--><!--shouldn't the next section be subsection of *Programmatic transaction management* section? However, there is a sentence in the next--><!--section that reads *regardless of whether you opt for declarative or prog. tx man. defining correct PlatformTransactionManager impl. is--><!--absolutely essential.* This is followed by discussion of that impl. So I'm not sure what goes where. |
|
|
|
TR: OK AS IS - I think it's fine as is - the concepts apply to both programmatic and declarative transactions |
|
-->With the preferred declarative model, developers typically write little or |
|
no code related to transaction management, and hence do not depend on |
|
the Spring Framework transaction API, or any other transaction |
|
API.</para> |
|
|
|
<sidebar> |
|
<title>Do you need an application server for transaction |
|
management?</title> |
|
|
|
<para>The Spring Framework's transaction management support changes |
|
traditional rules as to when an enterprise Java application requires |
|
an application server.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>In particular, you do not need an application server simply for |
|
declarative transactions through EJBs. In fact, even if your |
|
application server has powerful JTA capabilities, you may decide that |
|
the Spring Framework's declarative transactions offer more power and a |
|
more productive programming model than EJB CMT.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>Typically you need an application server's JTA capability only |
|
if your application needs to handle transactions across multiple |
|
resources, which is not a requirement for many applications. Many |
|
high-end applications use a single, highly scalable database (such as |
|
Oracle RAC) instead. Standalone transaction managers such as <ulink |
|
url="http://www.atomikos.com/">Atomikos Transactions</ulink> and |
|
<ulink url="http://jotm.objectweb.org/">JOTM</ulink> are other |
|
options. Of course, you may need other application server capabilities |
|
such as Java Message Service (JMS) and J2EE Connector Architecture |
|
(JCA).</para> |
|
|
|
<para>The Spring Framework <emphasis>gives you the choice of when to |
|
scale your application to a fully loaded application |
|
server</emphasis>. Gone are the days when the only alternative to |
|
using EJB CMT or JTA was to write code with local transactions such as |
|
those on JDBC connections, and face a hefty rework if you need that |
|
code to run within global, container-managed transactions. With the |
|
Spring Framework, only some of the bean definitions in your |
|
configuration file, rather than your code, need to change.</para> |
|
|
|
<!--CLarify last sentence. Only what kind of configuration has to change? |
|
TR: REVISED, PLS REVIEW - changed to say "some of the bean definitions in your configuration file"--> |
|
</sidebar> |
|
</section> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-strategies"> |
|
<title>Understanding the Spring Framework transaction abstraction<!--If this section applies only to prog. tx management, we should say that up front. Add info? |
|
TR: OK AS IS - It's relevant for declarative tx as well--></title> |
|
|
|
<para>The key to the Spring transaction abstraction is the notion of a |
|
<emphasis>transaction strategy</emphasis>. A transaction strategy is |
|
defined by the |
|
<interfacename>org.springframework.transaction.PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> |
|
interface:</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="java">public interface PlatformTransactionManager { |
|
|
|
TransactionStatus getTransaction(TransactionDefinition definition) |
|
throws TransactionException; |
|
|
|
void commit(TransactionStatus status) throws TransactionException; |
|
|
|
void rollback(TransactionStatus status) throws TransactionException; |
|
}</programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>This is primarily a service provider interface (SPI), although it |
|
can be used <link |
|
linkend="transaction-programmatic-ptm">programmatically</link> from your |
|
application code. <!--Write out SPI with SPI in parentheses. SPI stands for a number of different things.And does logic of sentence make sense? |
|
TR: REVISED, PLS REVIEW - spelled SPI out and added a bit of clarification at the end-->Because |
|
<interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> is an |
|
<emphasis>interface</emphasis>, it can be easily mocked or stubbed as |
|
necessary. It is not tied to a lookup strategy such as JNDI. |
|
<interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> implementations |
|
are defined like any other object (or bean) in the Spring Framework IoC |
|
container. This benefit alone makes Spring Framework transactions a |
|
worthwhile abstraction even when you work with JTA. Transactional code can |
|
be tested much more easily than if it used JTA directly.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>Again in keeping with Spring's philosophy, the |
|
<exceptionname>TransactionException</exceptionname> that can be thrown by |
|
any of the <interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> |
|
interface's methods is <emphasis>unchecked</emphasis> (that is, it extends |
|
the <exceptionname>java.lang.RuntimeException</exceptionname> class). |
|
Transaction infrastructure failures are almost invariably fatal. In rare |
|
cases where application code can actually recover from a transaction |
|
failure, the application developer can still choose to catch and handle |
|
<exceptionname>TransactionException</exceptionname>. The salient point is |
|
that developers are not <emphasis>forced</emphasis> to do so.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>The <methodname>getTransaction(..)</methodname> method returns a |
|
<interfacename>TransactionStatus</interfacename> object, depending on a |
|
<interfacename>TransactionDefinition</interfacename> parameter. The |
|
returned <interfacename>TransactionStatus</interfacename> might represent |
|
a new transaction, or can represent an existing transaction if a matching |
|
transaction exists in the current call stack. The implication in this |
|
latter case is that, as with Java EE transaction contexts, a |
|
<interfacename>TransactionStatus</interfacename> is associated with a |
|
<emphasis role="bold">thread</emphasis> of execution.<!--Previous sentences were difficult to follow because of all the parenthetical phrases.Revise if necessary. TR: OK AS IS--></para> |
|
|
|
<para>The <interfacename>TransactionDefinition</interfacename> interface |
|
specifies:</para> |
|
|
|
<itemizedlist> |
|
<listitem> |
|
<para><emphasis role="bold">Isolation</emphasis>: The degree to which |
|
this transaction is isolated from the work of other transactions. For |
|
example, can this transaction see uncommitted writes from other |
|
transactions?</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para><emphasis role="bold">Propagation</emphasis>: Typically, all |
|
code executed within a transaction scope will run in that transaction. |
|
However, you have the option of specifying the behavior in the event |
|
that a transactional method is executed when a transaction context |
|
already exists. <!--Correct to say you have options? A human has to specify what the behavior will be, right? TR: REVISED, PLS REVIEW-->For |
|
example, code can continue running in the existing transaction (the |
|
common case); or the existing transaction can be suspended and a new |
|
transaction created. <emphasis>Spring offers all of the transaction |
|
propagation options familiar from EJB CMT</emphasis>. To read about |
|
the semantics of transaction propagation in Spring, see <xref |
|
linkend="tx-propagation" />.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para><emphasis role="bold">Timeout</emphasis>: How long this |
|
transaction runs before timing out and being rolled back automatically |
|
by the underlying transaction infrastructure.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para><emphasis role="bold">Read-only status</emphasis>: A read-only |
|
transaction can be used when your code reads but does not modify data. |
|
Read-only transactions can be a useful optimization in some cases, |
|
such as when you are using Hibernate.</para> |
|
|
|
<!--describes status but we could say 'reads but does not modify' I added that it describes status. OK? Elaborate on purpose? |
|
TR:REVISED, PLS REVIEW--> |
|
</listitem> |
|
</itemizedlist> |
|
|
|
<para>These settings reflect standard transactional concepts. If |
|
necessary, refer to resources that discuss transaction isolation levels |
|
and other core transaction concepts. Understanding these concepts is |
|
essential to using the Spring Framework or any transaction management |
|
solution.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>The <interfacename>TransactionStatus</interfacename> interface |
|
provides a simple way for transactional code to control transaction |
|
execution and query transaction status. The concepts should be familiar, |
|
as they are common to all transaction APIs:</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="java">public interface TransactionStatus extends SavepointManager { |
|
|
|
boolean isNewTransaction(); |
|
|
|
boolean hasSavepoint(); |
|
|
|
void setRollbackOnly(); |
|
|
|
boolean isRollbackOnly(); |
|
|
|
void flush(); |
|
|
|
boolean isCompleted(); |
|
|
|
}</programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>Regardless of whether you opt for declarative or programmatic |
|
transaction management in Spring, defining the correct |
|
<interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> implementation |
|
is absolutely essential. You typically define this implementation through |
|
dependency injection.</para> |
|
|
|
<!--Do you need a link to an explanation of DI? |
|
TR: OK AS IS - at this point in the text, I don't think you would need that |
|
--> |
|
|
|
<para><interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> |
|
implementations normally require knowledge of the environment in which |
|
they work: JDBC, JTA, Hibernate, and so on. The following examples show |
|
how you can define a local |
|
<interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> implementation. |
|
(This example works with plain JDBC.)</para> |
|
|
|
<para>You define a JDBC <interfacename>DataSource</interfacename></para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="xml"><bean id="dataSource" class="org.apache.commons.dbcp.BasicDataSource" destroy-method="close"> |
|
<property name="driverClassName" value="${jdbc.driverClassName}" /> |
|
<property name="url" value="${jdbc.url}" /> |
|
<property name="username" value="${jdbc.username}" /> |
|
<property name="password" value="${jdbc.password}" /> |
|
</bean></programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>The related <interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> |
|
bean definition will then have a reference to the |
|
<interfacename>DataSource</interfacename> definition. It will look like this:</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="xml"><bean id="txManager" class="org.springframework.jdbc.datasource.DataSourceTransactionManager"> |
|
<property name="dataSource" ref="dataSource"/> |
|
</bean></programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>If you use JTA in a Java EE container then you use a container |
|
<interfacename>DataSource</interfacename>, obtained through JNDI, in |
|
conjunction with Spring's <classname>JtaTransactionManager</classname>. |
|
This is what the JTA and JNDI lookup version would look like:</para> |
|
|
|
<!--Indicate what the following example demonstrates.What is its purpose? TR: REVISED, PLS REVIEW--> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="xml"><?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> |
|
<beans xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans" |
|
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" |
|
xmlns:jee="http://www.springframework.org/schema/jee" |
|
xsi:schemaLocation=" |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans/spring-beans.xsd |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/jee |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/jee/spring-jee.xsd"> |
|
|
|
<jee:jndi-lookup id="dataSource" jndi-name="jdbc/jpetstore"/> |
|
|
|
<bean id="txManager" class="org.springframework.transaction.jta.JtaTransactionManager" /> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- other <literal><bean/></literal> definitions here --></lineannotation> |
|
|
|
</beans></programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>The <classname>JtaTransactionManager</classname> does not need to |
|
know about the <interfacename>DataSource</interfacename>, or any other |
|
specific resources, because it uses the container's global transaction |
|
management infrastructure.</para> |
|
|
|
<note> |
|
<para>The above definition of the <literal>dataSource</literal> bean |
|
uses the <literal><jndi-lookup/></literal> tag from the |
|
<literal>jee</literal> namespace. For more information on schema-based |
|
configuration, see <xref linkend="xsd-config" />, and for more |
|
information on the <literal><jee/></literal> tags see the section |
|
entitled <xref linkend="xsd-config-body-schemas-jee" />.</para> |
|
</note> |
|
|
|
<para>You can also use Hibernate local transactions easily, as shown in |
|
the following examples. In this case, you need to define a Hibernate |
|
<classname>LocalSessionFactoryBean</classname>, which your application |
|
code will use to obtain Hibernate <interfacename>Session</interfacename> |
|
instances.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>The <interfacename>DataSource</interfacename> bean definition will |
|
be similar to the local JDBC example shown previously and thus is not |
|
shown in the following example.</para> |
|
|
|
<!-- TR: added the following clarification rather than embed it in the text above--> |
|
|
|
<note> |
|
<para>If the <interfacename>DataSource</interfacename>, used by any |
|
non-JTA transaction manager, is looked up via JNDI and managed by a Java |
|
EE container, then it should be non-transactional because the Spring |
|
Framework, rather than the Java EE container, will manage the |
|
transactions.</para> |
|
</note> |
|
|
|
<para>The <literal>txManager</literal> bean in this case is of the |
|
<classname>HibernateTransactionManager</classname> type. In the same way |
|
as the <classname>DataSourceTransactionManager</classname> needs a |
|
reference to the <interfacename>DataSource</interfacename>, the |
|
<classname>HibernateTransactionManager</classname> needs a reference to |
|
the <interfacename>SessionFactory</interfacename>.</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="xml"><bean id="sessionFactory" class="org.springframework.orm.hibernate3.LocalSessionFactoryBean"> |
|
<property name="dataSource" ref="dataSource" /> |
|
<property name="mappingResources"> |
|
<list> |
|
<value>org/springframework/samples/petclinic/hibernate/petclinic.hbm.xml</value> |
|
</list> |
|
</property> |
|
<property name="hibernateProperties"> |
|
<value> |
|
hibernate.dialect=${hibernate.dialect} |
|
</value> |
|
</property> |
|
</bean> |
|
|
|
<bean id="txManager" class="org.springframework.orm.hibernate3.HibernateTransactionManager"> |
|
<property name="sessionFactory" ref="sessionFactory" /> |
|
</bean></programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>If you are using Hibernate and Java EE container-managed JTA |
|
transactions, then you should simply use the same |
|
<classname>JtaTransactionManager</classname> as in the previous JTA |
|
example for JDBC.<!--Use it to do what? Below, this *what* is identical to JTA config |
|
TR: REVISED, PLS REVIEW - I clarified this a bit |
|
--></para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="xml"><bean id="txManager" class="org.springframework.transaction.jta.JtaTransactionManager"/></programlisting> |
|
|
|
<note> |
|
<para>If you use JTA , then your transaction manager definition will |
|
look the same regardless of what data access technology you use, be it |
|
JDBC, Hibernate JPA or any other supported technology. This is due to |
|
the fact that JTA transactions are global transactions, which can enlist |
|
any transactional resource.</para> |
|
</note> |
|
|
|
<para>In all these cases, application code does not need to change. You |
|
can change how transactions are managed merely by changing configuration, |
|
even if that change means moving from local to global transactions or vice |
|
versa.</para> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="tx-resource-synchronization"> |
|
<title>Synchronizing resources with transactions</title> |
|
|
|
<para>It should now be clear how you create different transaction |
|
managers, and how they are linked to related resources that need to be |
|
synchronized to transactions (for example |
|
<classname>DataSourceTransactionManager</classname> to a JDBC |
|
<interfacename>DataSource</interfacename>, |
|
<classname>HibernateTransactionManager</classname> to a Hibernate |
|
<interfacename>SessionFactory</interfacename>, and so forth). This section |
|
describes how the application code, directly or indirectly using a |
|
persistence API such as JDBC, Hibernate, or JDO, ensures that these |
|
resources are created, reused, and cleaned up properly. The section also |
|
discusses how transaction synchronization is triggered (optionally) |
|
through the relevant |
|
<interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename>.<!--I broke into two sentences. Last part of sentence unclear,revise to say what triggers tx synch. Revise sentences if necessray. TR: OK--></para> |
|
|
|
<section id="tx-resource-synchronization-high"> |
|
<title>High-level synchronization approach</title> |
|
|
|
<para>The preferred approach is to use Spring's highest level template |
|
based persistence integration APIs or to use native ORM APIs with |
|
transaction- aware factory beans or proxies for managing the native |
|
resource factories. These transaction-aware solutions internally handle |
|
resource creation and reuse, cleanup, optional transaction |
|
synchronization of the resources, and exception mapping. Thus user data |
|
access code does not have to address these tasks, but can be focused |
|
purely on non-boilerplate persistence logic. Generally, you use the |
|
native ORM API or take a <emphasis>template</emphasis> approach for JDBC |
|
access by using the <classname>JdbcTemplate</classname>. These solutions |
|
are detailed in subsequent chapters of this reference documentation.<!--If this approach is preferred, why not give examples here as you do with less desirable approaches? At least provide--><!--x-refs? Also is it correct to refer to APIs, then give classes as examples? Should this be reworded? |
|
TR: REVISED, PLS REVIEW - I re-wrote this to match the current preferred approaches--></para> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="tx-resource-synchronization-low"> |
|
<title>Low-level synchronization approach</title> |
|
|
|
<para>Classes such as <classname>DataSourceUtils</classname> (for JDBC), |
|
<classname>EntityManagerFactoryUtils</classname> (for JPA), |
|
<classname>SessionFactoryUtils</classname> (for Hibernate), |
|
<classname>PersistenceManagerFactoryUtils</classname> (for JDO), and so |
|
on exist at a lower level. When you want the application code to deal |
|
directly with the resource types of the native persistence APIs, you use |
|
these classes to ensure that proper Spring Framework-managed instances |
|
are obtained, transactions are (optionally) synchronized, and exceptions |
|
that occur in the process are properly mapped to a consistent |
|
API.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>For example, in the case of JDBC, instead of the traditional JDBC |
|
approach of calling the <literal>getConnection()</literal> method on the |
|
<interfacename>DataSource</interfacename>, you instead use Spring's |
|
<classname>org.springframework.jdbc.datasource.DataSourceUtils</classname> |
|
class as follows:</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="java">Connection conn = DataSourceUtils.getConnection(dataSource);</programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>If an existing transaction already has a connection synchronized |
|
(linked) to it, that instance is returned. Otherwise, the method call |
|
triggers the creation of a new connection, which is (optionally) |
|
synchronized to any existing transaction, and made available for |
|
subsequent reuse in that same transaction. As mentioned, any |
|
<exceptionname>SQLException</exceptionname> is wrapped in a Spring |
|
Framework |
|
<exceptionname>CannotGetJdbcConnectionException</exceptionname>, one of |
|
the Spring Framework's hierarchy of unchecked DataAccessExceptions. This |
|
approach gives you more information than can be obtained easily from the |
|
<exceptionname>SQLException</exceptionname>, and ensures portability |
|
across databases, even across different persistence technologies.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>This approach also works without Spring transaction management |
|
(transaction synchronization is optional), so you can use it whether or |
|
not you are using Spring for transaction management.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>Of course, once you have used Spring's JDBC support, JPA support |
|
or Hibernate support, you will generally prefer not to use |
|
<classname>DataSourceUtils</classname> or the other helper classes, |
|
because you will be much happier working through the Spring abstraction |
|
than directly with the relevant APIs. For example, if you use the Spring |
|
<classname>JdbcTemplate</classname> or <literal>jdbc.object</literal> |
|
package to simplify your use of JDBC, correct connection retrieval |
|
occurs behind the scenes and you won't need to write any special |
|
code.</para> |
|
|
|
<!--I don't understand this. Why tell them to use DataSourceUtils and then say you will prefer Spring abstraction? |
|
Why not give example of using Spring abstraction? |
|
TR: OK AS IS - it's not the prefered way, but we need to cover this if someine decideds to use it--> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="tx-resource-synchronization-tadsp"> |
|
<title><classname>TransactionAwareDataSourceProxy</classname></title> |
|
|
|
<para>At the very lowest level exists the |
|
<classname>TransactionAwareDataSourceProxy</classname> class. This is a |
|
proxy for a target <interfacename>DataSource</interfacename>, which |
|
wraps the target <interfacename>DataSource</interfacename> to add |
|
awareness of Spring-managed transactions. In this respect, it is similar |
|
to a transactional JNDI <interfacename>DataSource</interfacename> as |
|
provided by a Java EE server.<!--What is the purpose of TransactionAwareDataSourceProxy, do you use it instead of 4.2 or 4.1 approaches or in addition to? |
|
TR: OK AS IS - it's and additional tool, rarely used, but needs to be documented--></para> |
|
|
|
<para>It should almost never be necessary or desirable to use this |
|
class, except when existing code must be called and passed a standard |
|
JDBC <interfacename>DataSource</interfacename> interface implementation. |
|
In that case, it is possible that this code is usable, but participating |
|
in Spring managed transactions. It is preferable to write your new code |
|
by using the higher level abstractions mentioned above.</para> |
|
</section> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-declarative"> |
|
<title>Declarative transaction management</title> |
|
|
|
<note> |
|
<para>Most Spring Framework users choose declarative transaction |
|
management. This option has the least impact on application code, and |
|
hence is most consistent with the ideals of a |
|
<emphasis>non-invasive</emphasis> lightweight container.</para> |
|
</note> |
|
|
|
<para>The Spring Framework's declarative transaction management is made |
|
possible with Spring aspect-oriented programming (AOP), although, as the |
|
transactional aspects code comes with the Spring Framework distribution |
|
and may be used in a boilerplate fashion, AOP concepts do not generally |
|
have to be understood to make effective use of this code.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>The Spring Framework's declarative transaction management is similar |
|
to EJB CMT in that you can specify transaction behavior (or lack of it) |
|
down to individual method level. It is possible to make a |
|
<methodname>setRollbackOnly()</methodname> call within a transaction |
|
context if necessary. The differences between the two types of transaction |
|
management are:</para> |
|
|
|
<itemizedlist> |
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Unlike EJB CMT, which is tied to JTA, the Spring Framework's |
|
declarative transaction management works in any environment. It can |
|
work with JTA transactions or local transactions using JDBC, JPA, |
|
Hibernate or JDO by simply adjusting the configuration files.<!--Indicate what kind of config changes? Changes to what |
|
TR: REVISED, PLS REVIEW - rewrote this to hoefully make it more clear--></para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>You can apply the Spring Framework declarative transaction |
|
management to any class, not merely special classes such as |
|
EJBs.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>The Spring Framework offers declarative <link |
|
linkend="transaction-declarative-rolling-back"><emphasis>rollback |
|
rules</emphasis>, </link>a feature with no EJB equivalent. Both |
|
programmatic and declarative support for rollback rules is |
|
provided.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>The Spring Framework enables you to customize transactional |
|
behavior, by using AOP. For example, you can insert custom behavior in |
|
the case of transaction rollback. You can also add arbitrary advice, |
|
along with the transactional advice. With EJB CMT, you cannot influence |
|
the container's transaction management except with |
|
<methodname>setRollbackOnly()</methodname>.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>The Spring Framework does not support propagation of transaction |
|
contexts across remote calls, as do high-end application servers. If |
|
you need this feature, we recommend that you use EJB. However, |
|
consider carefully before using such a feature, because normally, one |
|
does not want transactions to span remote calls.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
</itemizedlist> |
|
|
|
<sidebar> |
|
<title>Where is |
|
<classname>TransactionProxyFactoryBean</classname>?</title> |
|
|
|
<para>Declarative transaction configuration in versions of Spring 2.0 |
|
and above differs considerably from previous versions of Spring. The |
|
main difference is that there is no longer any need to configure |
|
<classname>TransactionProxyFactoryBean</classname> beans.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>The pre-Spring 2.0 configuration style is still 100% valid |
|
configuration; think of the new <literal><tx:tags/></literal> as |
|
simply defining <classname>TransactionProxyFactoryBean</classname> beans |
|
on your behalf.</para> |
|
</sidebar> |
|
|
|
<para>The concept of rollback rules is important: they enable you to |
|
specify which exceptions (and throwables) <!--If no difference between exceptions and throwables, delete throwables. TR: OK AS IS-->should |
|
cause automatic rollback. You specify this declaratively, in |
|
configuration, not in Java code. So, although you can still call |
|
<methodname>setRollbackOnly()</methodname>on the |
|
<interfacename>TransactionStatus</interfacename> object to roll back the |
|
current transaction back, most often you can specify a rule that |
|
<exceptionname>MyApplicationException</exceptionname> must always result |
|
in rollback. The significant advantage to this option is that business |
|
objects do not depend on the transaction infrastructure. For example, they |
|
typically do not need to import Spring transaction APIs or other Spring |
|
APIs.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>Although EJB container default behavior automatically rolls back the |
|
transaction on a <emphasis>system exception</emphasis> (usually a runtime |
|
exception), EJB CMT does not roll back the transaction automatically on an |
|
<emphasis>application exception</emphasis> (that is, a checked exception |
|
other than <exceptionname>java.rmi.RemoteException</exceptionname>). While |
|
the Spring default behavior for declarative transaction management follows |
|
EJB convention (roll back is automatic only on unchecked exceptions), it |
|
is often useful to customize this behavior.</para> |
|
|
|
<!--customize this so that what happens? TR: OK AS IS - i think - the option is to provide alternate rules for when a transaction |
|
would be rolled back, not necessarily following the EJB rules--> |
|
|
|
<section id="tx-decl-explained"> |
|
<title>Understanding the Spring Framework's declarative transaction |
|
implementation</title> |
|
|
|
<para>It is not sufficient to tell you simply to annotate your classes |
|
with the <interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> annotation, add |
|
the line (<literal><tx:annotation-driven/></literal>) to your |
|
configuration, and then expect you to understand how it all works. This |
|
section explains the inner workings of the Spring Framework's |
|
declarative transaction infrastructure in the event of |
|
transaction-related issues.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>The most important concepts to grasp with regard to the Spring |
|
Framework's declarative transaction support are that this support is |
|
enabled <link linkend="aop-understanding-aop-proxies"><emphasis>via AOP |
|
proxies</emphasis></link>, and that the transactional advice is driven |
|
by <emphasis>metadata</emphasis> (currently XML- or annotation-based). |
|
The combination of AOP with transactional metadata yields an AOP proxy |
|
that uses a <classname>TransactionInterceptor</classname> in conjunction |
|
with an appropriate <classname>PlatformTransactionManager</classname> |
|
implementation to drive transactions <emphasis>around method |
|
invocations</emphasis>.</para> |
|
|
|
<note> |
|
<para>Spring AOP is covered in <xref linkend="aop" />.</para> |
|
</note> |
|
|
|
<para>Conceptually, calling a method on a transactional proxy looks like |
|
this...</para> |
|
|
|
<!--I don't see this image in src file or in pdf. Maybe it was added to src after pdf was created? |
|
TR: OK AS IS. images don't show up in the editor, but they do show up in the generated docs--> |
|
|
|
<para><mediaobject> |
|
<imageobject role="fo"> |
|
<imagedata align="center" fileref="images/tx.png" format="PNG" /> |
|
</imageobject> |
|
|
|
<imageobject role="html"> |
|
<imagedata align="center" fileref="images/tx.png" format="PNG" /> |
|
</imageobject> |
|
</mediaobject></para> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-declarative-first-example"> |
|
<title>Example of declarative transaction implementation</title> |
|
|
|
<para>Consider the following interface, and its attendant |
|
implementation. This example uses <classname>Foo</classname> and |
|
<classname>Bar</classname> classes as placeholders so that you can |
|
concentrate on the transaction usage without focusing on a particular |
|
domain model. For the purposes of this example, the fact that the |
|
<classname>DefaultFooService</classname> class throws |
|
<exceptionname>UnsupportedOperationException</exceptionname> instances |
|
in the body of each implemented method is good; it allows you to see |
|
transactions created and then rolled back in response to the |
|
<exceptionname>UnsupportedOperationException</exceptionname> instance. |
|
</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="java"><lineannotation>// the service interface that we want to make transactional</lineannotation> |
|
|
|
package x.y.service; |
|
|
|
public interface FooService { |
|
|
|
Foo getFoo(String fooName); |
|
|
|
Foo getFoo(String fooName, String barName); |
|
|
|
void insertFoo(Foo foo); |
|
|
|
void updateFoo(Foo foo); |
|
|
|
}</programlisting> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="java"><lineannotation>// an implementation of the above interface</lineannotation> |
|
|
|
package x.y.service; |
|
|
|
public class DefaultFooService implements FooService { |
|
|
|
public Foo getFoo(String fooName) { |
|
throw new UnsupportedOperationException(); |
|
} |
|
|
|
public Foo getFoo(String fooName, String barName) { |
|
throw new UnsupportedOperationException(); |
|
} |
|
|
|
public void insertFoo(Foo foo) { |
|
throw new UnsupportedOperationException(); |
|
} |
|
|
|
public void updateFoo(Foo foo) { |
|
throw new UnsupportedOperationException(); |
|
} |
|
|
|
}</programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>Assume that the first two methods of the |
|
<interfacename>FooService</interfacename> interface<literal>, |
|
getFoo(String)</literal> and <literal>getFoo(String, String), |
|
</literal>must execute in the context of a transaction with read-only |
|
semantics, and that the other methods<literal>,insertFoo(Foo)</literal> |
|
and <literal>updateFoo(Foo),</literal> must execute in the context of a |
|
transaction with read-write semantics. The following configuration is |
|
explained in detail in the next few paragraphs.</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="xml"><lineannotation><!-- from the file <literal>'context.xml'</literal> --></lineannotation> |
|
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> |
|
<beans xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans" |
|
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" |
|
xmlns:aop="http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop" |
|
<lineannotation><emphasis role="bold">xmlns:tx="http://www.springframework.org/schema/tx"</emphasis></lineannotation> |
|
xsi:schemaLocation=" |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans/spring-beans.xsd |
|
<lineannotation><emphasis role="bold">http://www.springframework.org/schema/tx |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/tx/spring-tx.xsd</emphasis></lineannotation> |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop/spring-aop.xsd"> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- this is the service object that we want to make transactional --></lineannotation> |
|
<bean id="fooService" class="x.y.service.DefaultFooService"/> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- the transactional advice (what 'happens'; see the <literal><aop:advisor/></literal> bean below) --></lineannotation> |
|
<tx:advice id="txAdvice" transaction-manager="txManager"> |
|
<lineannotation><!-- the transactional semantics... --></lineannotation> |
|
<tx:attributes> |
|
<lineannotation><!-- all methods starting with <literal>'get'</literal> are read-only --></lineannotation> |
|
<tx:method name="get*" read-only="true"/> |
|
<lineannotation><!-- other methods use the default transaction settings (see below) --></lineannotation> |
|
<tx:method name="*"/> |
|
</tx:attributes> |
|
</tx:advice> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- ensure that the above transactional advice runs for any execution |
|
of an operation defined by the <interfacename>FooService</interfacename> interface --></lineannotation> |
|
<aop:config> |
|
<aop:pointcut id="fooServiceOperation" expression="execution(* x.y.service.FooService.*(..))"/> |
|
<aop:advisor advice-ref="txAdvice" pointcut-ref="fooServiceOperation"/> |
|
</aop:config> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- don't forget the <interfacename>DataSource</interfacename> --></lineannotation> |
|
<bean id="dataSource" class="org.apache.commons.dbcp.BasicDataSource" destroy-method="close"> |
|
<property name="driverClassName" value="oracle.jdbc.driver.OracleDriver"/> |
|
<property name="url" value="jdbc:oracle:thin:@rj-t42:1521:elvis"/> |
|
<property name="username" value="scott"/> |
|
<property name="password" value="tiger"/> |
|
</bean> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- similarly, don't forget the <interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> --></lineannotation> |
|
<bean id="txManager" class="org.springframework.jdbc.datasource.DataSourceTransactionManager"> |
|
<property name="dataSource" ref="dataSource"/> |
|
</bean> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- other <literal><bean/></literal> definitions here --></lineannotation> |
|
|
|
</beans></programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>Examine the preceding configuration. You want to make a service |
|
object, the <literal>fooService</literal> bean, transactional. The |
|
transaction semantics to apply are encapsulated in the |
|
<literal><tx:advice/></literal> definition. The |
|
<literal><tx:advice/></literal> definition reads as |
|
<quote><emphasis>... all methods on starting with |
|
<literal>'get'</literal> are to execute in the context of a read-only |
|
transaction, and all other methods are to execute with the default |
|
transaction semantics</emphasis></quote>. The |
|
<literal>transaction-manager</literal> attribute of the |
|
<literal><tx:advice/></literal> tag is set to the name of the |
|
<interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> bean that is |
|
going to <emphasis>drive</emphasis> the transactions, in this case, the |
|
<literal>txManager</literal> bean.</para> |
|
|
|
<tip> |
|
<para>You can omit the <literal>transaction-manager</literal> |
|
attribute in the transactional advice |
|
(<literal><tx:advice/></literal>) if the bean name of the |
|
<interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> that you |
|
want to wire in has the name <literal>transactionManager</literal>. If |
|
the <interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> bean |
|
that you want to wire in has any other name, then you must use the |
|
<literal>transaction-manager</literal> attribute explicitly, as in the |
|
preceding example.</para> |
|
</tip> |
|
|
|
<para>The <literal><aop:config/></literal> definition ensures that |
|
the transactional advice defined by the <literal>txAdvice</literal> bean |
|
executes at the appropriate points in the program. First you define a |
|
pointcut that matches the execution of any operation defined in the |
|
<interfacename>FooService</interfacename> interface |
|
(<literal>fooServiceOperation</literal>). Then you associate the |
|
pointcut with the <literal>txAdvice</literal> using an advisor. The |
|
result indicates that at the execution of a |
|
<literal>fooServiceOperation</literal>, the advice defined by |
|
<literal>txAdvice</literal> will be run.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>The expression defined within the |
|
<literal><aop:pointcut/></literal> element is an AspectJ pointcut |
|
expression; see <xref linkend="aop" /> for more details on pointcut |
|
expressions in Spring 2.0.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>A common requirement is to make an entire service layer |
|
transactional. The best way to do this is simply to change the pointcut |
|
expression to match any operation in your service layer. For |
|
example:</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="xml"><aop:config> |
|
<aop:pointcut id="fooServiceMethods" expression="execution(* x.y.service.*.*(..))"/> |
|
<aop:advisor advice-ref="txAdvice" pointcut-ref="fooServiceMethods"/> |
|
</aop:config></programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para><note> |
|
<para><emphasis>In this example it is assumed that all your service |
|
interfaces are defined in the <literal>x.y.service</literal> |
|
package; see <xref linkend="aop" /> for more |
|
details.</emphasis></para> |
|
</note></para> |
|
|
|
<para>Now that we've analyzed the configuration, you may be asking |
|
yourself, <quote><emphasis>Okay... but what does all this configuration |
|
actually do?</emphasis></quote>.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>The above configuration will be used to create a transactional |
|
proxy around the object that is created from the |
|
<literal>fooService</literal> bean definition. <!--Clarify what you mean by around the object; do you mean associated with the object? Revise to clarify. Around is vague. |
|
TR: OK AS IS - around is used a lot in AOP, so I think the audience will understand this usage-->The |
|
proxy will be configured with the transactional advice, so that when an |
|
appropriate method is invoked <emphasis>on the proxy</emphasis>, a |
|
transaction is started, suspended, marked as read-only, and so on, |
|
depending on the transaction configuration associated with that method. |
|
Consider the following program that test drives the above |
|
configuration:</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="java">public final class Boot { |
|
|
|
public static void main(final String[] args) throws Exception { |
|
ApplicationContext ctx = new ClassPathXmlApplicationContext("context.xml", Boot.class); |
|
FooService fooService = (FooService) ctx.getBean("fooService"); |
|
fooService.insertFoo (new Foo()); |
|
} |
|
}</programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>The output from running the preceding program will resemble the |
|
following. (The Log4J output and the stack trace from the |
|
UnsupportedOperationException thrown by the insertFoo(..) method of the |
|
DefaultFooService class have been truncated for clarity.)</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="xml"> <lineannotation><emphasis role="bold"><!-- the Spring container is starting up... --></emphasis></lineannotation> |
|
[AspectJInvocationContextExposingAdvisorAutoProxyCreator] - Creating implicit proxy |
|
for bean 'fooService' with 0 common interceptors and 1 specific interceptors |
|
<lineannotation><emphasis role="bold"><!-- the <classname>DefaultFooService</classname> is actually proxied --></emphasis></lineannotation> |
|
[JdkDynamicAopProxy] - Creating JDK dynamic proxy for [x.y.service.DefaultFooService] |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><emphasis role="bold"><!-- ... the <literal>insertFoo(..)</literal> method is now being invoked on the proxy --></emphasis></lineannotation> |
|
|
|
[TransactionInterceptor] - Getting transaction for x.y.service.FooService.insertFoo |
|
<lineannotation><emphasis role="bold"><!-- the transactional advice kicks in here... --></emphasis></lineannotation> |
|
[DataSourceTransactionManager] - Creating new transaction with name [x.y.service.FooService.insertFoo] |
|
[DataSourceTransactionManager] - Acquired Connection |
|
[org.apache.commons.dbcp.PoolableConnection@a53de4] for JDBC transaction |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><emphasis role="bold"><!-- the <literal>insertFoo(..)</literal> method from <classname>DefaultFooService</classname> throws an exception... --></emphasis></lineannotation> |
|
[RuleBasedTransactionAttribute] - Applying rules to determine whether transaction should |
|
rollback on java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException |
|
[TransactionInterceptor] - Invoking rollback for transaction on x.y.service.FooService.insertFoo |
|
due to throwable [java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException] |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><emphasis role="bold"><!-- and the transaction is rolled back (by default, <exceptionname>RuntimeException</exceptionname> instances cause rollback) --></emphasis></lineannotation> |
|
[DataSourceTransactionManager] - Rolling back JDBC transaction on Connection |
|
[org.apache.commons.dbcp.PoolableConnection@a53de4] |
|
[DataSourceTransactionManager] - Releasing JDBC Connection after transaction |
|
[DataSourceUtils] - Returning JDBC Connection to DataSource |
|
|
|
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException |
|
at x.y.service.DefaultFooService.insertFoo(DefaultFooService.java:14) |
|
<lineannotation><emphasis role="bold"><!-- AOP infrastructure stack trace elements removed for clarity --></emphasis></lineannotation> |
|
at $Proxy0.insertFoo(Unknown Source) |
|
at Boot.main(Boot.java:11)</programlisting> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-declarative-rolling-back"> |
|
<title>Rolling back a declarative transaction</title> |
|
|
|
<para>The previous section outlined the basics of how to specify |
|
transactional settings for classes, typically service layer classes, |
|
declaratively in your application. This section describes how you can |
|
control the rollback of transactions in a simple declarative |
|
fashion.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>The recommended way to indicate to the Spring Framework's |
|
transaction infrastructure that a transaction's work is to be rolled |
|
back is to throw an <exceptionname>Exception</exceptionname> from code |
|
that is currently executing in the context of a transaction. The Spring |
|
Framework's transaction infrastructure code will catch any unhandled |
|
<exceptionname>Exception</exceptionname> as it bubbles up the call |
|
stack, and make a determination whether to mark the transaction for |
|
rollback.<!--I changed to *can be configured* because next sentence says it does not do this by default in all cases. |
|
TR: REVISED, PLS REVIEW. I changed it to *in its default configuration*BT: I STILL DON'T GET IT. PRECEDING SENTENCE AND FOLLOWING --><!--SENTENCE SEEM CONTRADICTORY. TR: REVISED AGAIN, PLS REVIEW.--></para> |
|
|
|
<para>In its default configuration, the Spring Framework's transaction |
|
infrastructure code <emphasis>only</emphasis> marks a transaction for |
|
rollback in the case of runtime, unchecked exceptions; that is, when the |
|
thrown exception is an instance or subclass of |
|
<exceptionname>RuntimeException</exceptionname>. |
|
(<exceptionname>Error</exceptionname>s will also - by default - result |
|
in a rollback). Checked exceptions that are thrown from a transactional |
|
method do <emphasis>not</emphasis> result in rollback in the default |
|
configuration.<!--I revised preceding because it says ONLY first case is rolled back by default, but then says Errors are also marked by default. |
|
TR: OK AS IS. Errors aren't thrown by application code, only checked or unchecked exceptions are. So the Errors part is just clarifying that |
|
if the underlying application server infrastructure throws an Error the transaction will be rolled back.--></para> |
|
|
|
<para>You can configure exactly which |
|
<exceptionname>Exception</exceptionname> types mark a transaction for |
|
rollback, including checked exceptions. The following XML snippet |
|
demonstrates how you configure rollback for a checked, |
|
application-specific <exceptionname>Exception</exceptionname> |
|
type.</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="xml"><tx:advice id="txAdvice" transaction-manager="txManager"> |
|
<tx:attributes> |
|
<tx:method name="get*" read-only="true" <lineannotation><emphasis |
|
role="bold">rollback-for="NoProductInStockException"</emphasis></lineannotation>/> |
|
<tx:method name="*"/> |
|
</tx:attributes> |
|
</tx:advice></programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>You can also specify 'no rollback rules', if you do |
|
<emphasis>not</emphasis> want a transaction rolled back when an |
|
exception is thrown. The following example tells the Spring Framework's |
|
transaction infrastructure to commit the attendant transaction even in |
|
the face of an unhandled |
|
<exceptionname>InstrumentNotFoundException</exceptionname>.</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="xml"><tx:advice id="txAdvice"> |
|
<tx:attributes> |
|
<tx:method name="updateStock" <lineannotation><emphasis role="bold">no-rollback-for="InstrumentNotFoundException"</emphasis></lineannotation>/> |
|
<tx:method name="*"/> |
|
</tx:attributes> |
|
</tx:advice></programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>When the Spring Framework's transaction infrastructure catches an |
|
exception and is consults configured rollback rules to determine whether |
|
to mark the transaction for rollback, the <emphasis>strongest</emphasis> |
|
matching rule wins. So in the case of the following configuration, any |
|
exception other than an |
|
<exceptionname>InstrumentNotFoundException</exceptionname> results in a |
|
rollback of the attendant transaction.</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="xml"><tx:advice id="txAdvice"> |
|
<tx:attributes> |
|
<tx:method name="*" rollback-for="Throwable" no-rollback-for="InstrumentNotFoundException"/> |
|
</tx:attributes> |
|
</tx:advice></programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>You can also indicate a required rollback |
|
<emphasis>programmatically</emphasis>. Although very simple, this |
|
process is quite invasive, and tightly couples your code to the Spring |
|
Framework's transaction infrastructure:</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="java">public void resolvePosition() { |
|
try { |
|
<lineannotation>// some business logic...</lineannotation> |
|
} catch (NoProductInStockException ex) { |
|
<lineannotation>// trigger rollback programmatically</lineannotation> |
|
TransactionAspectSupport.currentTransactionStatus().setRollbackOnly(); |
|
} |
|
}</programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>You are strongly encouraged to use the declarative approach to |
|
rollback if at all possible. Programmatic rollback is available should |
|
you absolutely need it, but its usage flies in the face of achieving a |
|
clean POJO-based architecture.</para> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-declarative-diff-tx"> |
|
<title>Configuring different transactional semantics for different |
|
beans</title> |
|
|
|
<para>Consider the scenario where you have a number of service layer |
|
objects, and you want to apply a <emphasis>totally different</emphasis> |
|
transactional configuration to each of them. You do this by defining |
|
distinct <literal><aop:advisor/></literal> elements with differing |
|
<literal>pointcut</literal> and <literal>advice-ref</literal> attribute |
|
values.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>As a point of comparison, first assume that all of your service |
|
layer classes are defined in a root <literal>x.y.service</literal> |
|
package. To make all beans that are instances of classes defined in that |
|
package (or in subpackages) and that have names ending in |
|
<literal>Service</literal> have the default transactional configuration, |
|
you would write the following:</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="xml"><?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> |
|
<beans xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans" |
|
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" |
|
xmlns:aop="http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop" |
|
xmlns:tx="http://www.springframework.org/schema/tx" |
|
xsi:schemaLocation=" |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans/spring-beans.xsd |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/tx |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/tx/spring-tx.xsd |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop/spring-aop.xsd"> |
|
|
|
<aop:config> |
|
|
|
<aop:pointcut id="serviceOperation" |
|
expression="<lineannotation>execution(* x.y.service..*Service.*(..))</lineannotation>"/> |
|
|
|
<aop:advisor pointcut-ref="serviceOperation" advice-ref="txAdvice"/> |
|
|
|
</aop:config> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- these two beans will be transactional... --></lineannotation> |
|
<bean id="fooService" class="x.y.service.DefaultFooService"/> |
|
<bean id="barService" class="x.y.service.extras.SimpleBarService"/> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- ... and these two beans won't --></lineannotation> |
|
<bean id="anotherService" class="org.xyz.SomeService"/> <lineannotation><!-- (not in the right package) --></lineannotation> |
|
<bean id="barManager" class="x.y.service.SimpleBarManager"/> <lineannotation><!-- (doesn't end in 'Service') --></lineannotation> |
|
|
|
<tx:advice id="txAdvice"> |
|
<tx:attributes> |
|
<tx:method name="get*" read-only="true"/> |
|
<tx:method name="*"/> |
|
</tx:attributes> |
|
</tx:advice> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- other transaction infrastructure beans such as a <interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> omitted... --></lineannotation> |
|
|
|
</beans></programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>The following example shows how to configure two distinct beans |
|
with totally different transactional settings.</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="xml"><?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> |
|
<beans xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans" |
|
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" |
|
xmlns:aop="http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop" |
|
xmlns:tx="http://www.springframework.org/schema/tx" |
|
xsi:schemaLocation=" |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans/spring-beans.xsd |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/tx |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/tx/spring-tx.xsd |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop/spring-aop.xsd"> |
|
|
|
<aop:config> |
|
|
|
<aop:pointcut id="defaultServiceOperation" |
|
expression="<lineannotation>execution(* x.y.service.*Service.*(..))</lineannotation>"/> |
|
|
|
<aop:pointcut id="noTxServiceOperation" |
|
expression="<lineannotation>execution(* x.y.service.ddl.DefaultDdlManager.*(..))</lineannotation>"/> |
|
|
|
<aop:advisor pointcut-ref="defaultServiceOperation" advice-ref="defaultTxAdvice"/> |
|
|
|
<aop:advisor pointcut-ref="noTxServiceOperation" advice-ref="noTxAdvice"/> |
|
|
|
</aop:config> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- this bean will be transactional (see the <literal>'defaultServiceOperation'</literal> pointcut) --></lineannotation> |
|
<bean id="fooService" class="x.y.service.DefaultFooService"/> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- this bean will also be transactional, but with totally different transactional settings --></lineannotation> |
|
<bean id="anotherFooService" class="x.y.service.ddl.DefaultDdlManager"/> |
|
|
|
<tx:advice id="defaultTxAdvice"> |
|
<tx:attributes> |
|
<tx:method name="get*" read-only="true"/> |
|
<tx:method name="*"/> |
|
</tx:attributes> |
|
</tx:advice> |
|
|
|
<tx:advice id="noTxAdvice"> |
|
<tx:attributes> |
|
<tx:method name="*" propagation="NEVER"/> |
|
</tx:attributes> |
|
</tx:advice> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- other transaction infrastructure beans such as a <interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> omitted... --></lineannotation> |
|
|
|
</beans></programlisting> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-declarative-txadvice-settings"> |
|
<title><literal><tx:advice/></literal> settings</title> |
|
|
|
<para>This section summarizes the various transactional settings that |
|
can be specified using the <literal><tx:advice/></literal> tag. |
|
The default <literal><tx:advice/></literal> settings are:</para> |
|
|
|
<para><itemizedlist> |
|
<listitem> |
|
<para><link linkend="tx-propagation">Propagation setting</link> is |
|
<literal>REQUIRED.</literal></para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Isolation level is <literal>DEFAULT.</literal></para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Transaction is read/write.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Transaction timeout defaults to the default timeout of the |
|
underlying transaction system, or none if timeouts are not |
|
supported.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Any <exceptionname>RuntimeException</exceptionname> triggers |
|
rollback, and any checked <exceptionname>Exception</exceptionname> |
|
does not.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
</itemizedlist></para> |
|
|
|
<para>You can change these default settings; the various attributes of |
|
the <literal><tx:method/></literal> tags that are nested within |
|
<literal><tx:advice/></literal> and |
|
<literal><tx:attributes/></literal> tags are summarized |
|
below:</para> |
|
|
|
<para><table id="tx-method-settings"> |
|
<title><literal><tx:method/></literal> settings</title> |
|
|
|
<tgroup cols="4"> |
|
<colspec colnum="1" colwidth="1*" /> |
|
|
|
<colspec colnum="2" colwidth="0.4*" /> |
|
|
|
<colspec colnum="3" colwidth="0.6*" /> |
|
|
|
<colspec colnum="4" colwidth="2*" /> |
|
|
|
<thead> |
|
<row> |
|
<entry>Attribute</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Required?</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Default</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Description</entry> |
|
</row> |
|
</thead> |
|
|
|
<tbody> |
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal>name</literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Yes</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry><para>Method name(s) with which the transaction |
|
attributes are to be associated. The wildcard (*) character |
|
can be used to associate the same transaction attribute |
|
settings with a number of methods; for example, |
|
<literal>get*</literal>, <literal>handle*</literal>,<literal> |
|
on*Event</literal>, and so forth.</para></entry> |
|
</row> |
|
|
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal>propagation</literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>No</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>REQUIRED</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Transaction propagation behavior.</entry> |
|
</row> |
|
|
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal>isolation</literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>No</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>DEFAULT</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Transaction isolation level.</entry> |
|
</row> |
|
|
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal>timeout</literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>No</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>-1</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Transaction timeout value (in seconds).</entry> |
|
</row> |
|
|
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal>read-only</literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>No</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>false</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Is this transaction read-only?</entry> |
|
</row> |
|
|
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal>rollback-for</literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>No</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry><para><literal>Exception(s)</literal> that trigger |
|
rollback; comma-delimited. For example, |
|
<literal>com.foo.MyBusinessException,ServletException.</literal></para></entry> |
|
</row> |
|
|
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal>no-rollback-for</literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>No</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry><para><literal>Exception(s)</literal> that do |
|
<emphasis>not</emphasis> trigger rollback; comma-delimited. |
|
For example, |
|
<literal>com.foo.MyBusinessException,ServletException.</literal></para></entry> |
|
</row> |
|
</tbody> |
|
</tgroup> |
|
</table></para> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-declarative-annotations"> |
|
<title>Using <interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename></title> |
|
|
|
<para>In addition to the XML-based declarative approach to transaction |
|
configuration, you can use an annotation-based approach. Declaring |
|
transaction semantics directly in the Java source code puts the |
|
declarations much closer to the affected code. There is not much danger |
|
of undue coupling, because code that is meant to be used transactionally |
|
is almost always deployed that way anyway.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>The ease-of-use afforded by the use of the |
|
<interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> annotation is best |
|
illustrated with an example, which is explained in the text that |
|
follows. Consider the following class definition:</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="java"><lineannotation>// the service class that we want to make transactional</lineannotation> |
|
<emphasis role="bold">@Transactional</emphasis> |
|
public class DefaultFooService implements FooService { |
|
|
|
Foo getFoo(String fooName); |
|
|
|
Foo getFoo(String fooName, String barName); |
|
|
|
void insertFoo(Foo foo); |
|
|
|
void updateFoo(Foo foo); |
|
}</programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>When the above POJO is defined as a bean in a Spring IoC |
|
container, the bean instance can be made transactional by adding merely |
|
<emphasis>one</emphasis> line of XML configuration:</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="xml"><lineannotation><!-- from the file <literal>'context.xml'</literal> --></lineannotation> |
|
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> |
|
<beans xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans" |
|
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" |
|
xmlns:aop="http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop" |
|
xmlns:tx="http://www.springframework.org/schema/tx" |
|
xsi:schemaLocation=" |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans/spring-beans.xsd |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/tx |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/tx/spring-tx.xsd |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop/spring-aop.xsd"> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- this is the service object that we want to make transactional --></lineannotation> |
|
<bean id="fooService" class="x.y.service.DefaultFooService"/> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- enable the configuration of transactional behavior based on annotations --></lineannotation> |
|
<emphasis role="bold"><tx:annotation-driven transaction-manager="txManager"/></emphasis> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- a <interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> is still required --></lineannotation> |
|
<bean id="txManager" class="org.springframework.jdbc.datasource.DataSourceTransactionManager"> |
|
<lineannotation><!-- (this dependency is defined somewhere else) --></lineannotation> |
|
<property name="dataSource" ref="dataSource"/> |
|
</bean> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- other <literal><bean/></literal> definitions here --></lineannotation> |
|
|
|
</beans></programlisting> |
|
|
|
<tip> |
|
<para>You can omit the <literal>transaction-manager</literal> |
|
attribute in the <literal><tx:annotation-driven/></literal> tag |
|
if the bean name of the |
|
<interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> that you |
|
want to wire in has the name <literal>transactionManager</literal>. If |
|
the <interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> bean |
|
that you want to dependency-inject has any other name, then you have |
|
to use the <literal>transaction-manager</literal> attribute |
|
explicitly, as in the preceding example.</para> |
|
</tip> |
|
|
|
<sidebar> |
|
<title>Method visibility and |
|
<interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename></title> |
|
|
|
<para>When using proxies, you should apply the |
|
<interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> annotation only to |
|
methods with <emphasis>public</emphasis> visibility. If you do |
|
annotate protected, private or package-visible methods with the |
|
<interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> annotation, no error is |
|
raised, but the annotated method does not exhibit the configured |
|
transactional settings. Consider the use of AspectJ (see below) if you |
|
need to annotate non-public methods.</para> |
|
</sidebar> |
|
|
|
<para>You can place the <interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> |
|
annotation before an interface definition, a method on an interface, a |
|
class definition, or a <emphasis>public</emphasis> method on a class. |
|
However, the mere presence of the |
|
<interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> annotation is not enough |
|
to activate the transactional behavior. The |
|
<interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> annotation is simply |
|
metadata that can be consumed by some runtime infrastructure that is |
|
<interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename>-aware and that can use the |
|
metadata to configure the appropriate beans with transactional behavior. |
|
In the preceding example, the |
|
<literal><tx:annotation-driven/></literal> element |
|
<emphasis>switches on</emphasis> the transactional behavior.</para> |
|
|
|
<para><tip> |
|
<para>Spring recommends that you only annotate concrete classes (and |
|
methods of concrete classes) with the |
|
<interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> annotation, as opposed |
|
to annotating interfaces. You certainly can place the |
|
<interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> annotation on an |
|
interface (or an interface method), but this works only as you would |
|
expect it to if you are using interface-based proxies. The fact that |
|
Java annotations are <emphasis>not inherited from interfaces</emphasis> |
|
means that if you are using class-based proxies |
|
(<literal>proxy-target-class="true"</literal>) or the weaving-based |
|
aspect (<literal>mode="aspectj"</literal>), then the transaction |
|
settings are not recognized by the proxying and weaving |
|
infrastructure, and the object will not be wrapped in a |
|
transactional proxy, which would be decidedly |
|
<emphasis>bad</emphasis>.</para> |
|
</tip></para> |
|
|
|
<note> |
|
<para>In proxy mode (which is the default), only external method calls |
|
coming in through the proxy are intercepted. This means that |
|
self-invocation, in effect, a method within the target object calling |
|
another method of the target object, will not lead to an actual |
|
transaction at runtime even if the invoked method is marked with |
|
<interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename>.</para> |
|
</note> |
|
|
|
<para>Consider the use of AspectJ mode (see mode attribute in table |
|
below) if you expect self-invocations to be wrapped with transactions as |
|
well. <!--*see below* is not clear re AspectJmode. Provide clear x-ref to mode in table below, or to Using Transactional with AspectJ section. Also clarify reference to *as well*. As well as what?--><!--Below, *in this case* meaning in *what* case? Explain what table shows. TR: REVISED, PLS REVIEW-->In |
|
this case, there will not be a proxy in the first place; instead, the |
|
target class will be weaved (that is, its byte code will be modified) in |
|
order to turn <interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> into runtime |
|
behavior on any kind of method.</para> |
|
|
|
<para><table id="tx-annotation-driven-settings"> |
|
<title><literal><tx:annotation-driven/></literal> |
|
settings</title> |
|
|
|
<tgroup cols="3"> |
|
<thead> |
|
<row> |
|
<entry>Attribute</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Default</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Description</entry> |
|
</row> |
|
</thead> |
|
|
|
<tbody> |
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal>transaction-manager</literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>transactionManager</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry><para>Name of transaction manager to use. Only required |
|
if the name of the transaction manager is not |
|
<literal>transactionManager</literal>, as in the example |
|
above.</para></entry> |
|
</row> |
|
|
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal>mode</literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>proxy</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry><para>The default mode "proxy" processes annotated |
|
beans to be proxied using Spring's AOP framework (following |
|
proxy semantics, as discussed above, applying to method calls |
|
coming in through the proxy only). The alternative mode |
|
"aspectj" instead weaves the affected classes with Spring's |
|
AspectJ transaction aspect, modifying the target class byte |
|
code to apply to any kind of method call. AspectJ weaving |
|
requires spring-aspects.jar in the classpath as well as |
|
load-time weaving (or compile-time weaving) enabled. (See |
|
<xref linkend="aop-aj-ltw-spring" /> for details on how to set |
|
up load-time weaving.)</para></entry> |
|
</row> |
|
|
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal>proxy-target-class</literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>false</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry><para>Applies to proxy mode only. Controls what type of |
|
transactional proxies are created for classes annotated with |
|
the <interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> annotation. |
|
If the <literal>proxy-target-class</literal> attribute is set |
|
to <literal>true</literal>, then class-based proxies are |
|
created. If <literal>proxy-target-class</literal> is |
|
<literal>false</literal> or if the attribute is omitted, then |
|
standard JDK interface-based proxies are created. (See <xref |
|
linkend="aop-proxying" /> for a detailed examination of the |
|
different proxy types.)</para></entry> |
|
</row> |
|
|
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal>order</literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Ordered.LOWEST_PRECEDENCE</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry><para>Defines the order of the transaction advice that |
|
is applied to beans annotated with |
|
<interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename>. (For more |
|
information about the rules related to ordering of AOP advice, |
|
see <xref linkend="aop-ataspectj-advice-ordering" />.) No |
|
specified ordering means that the AOP subsystem determines the |
|
order of the advice.</para></entry> |
|
</row> |
|
</tbody> |
|
</tgroup> |
|
</table></para> |
|
|
|
<note> |
|
<para>The <literal>proxy-target-class</literal> attribute on the |
|
<literal><tx:annotation-driven/></literal> element controls what |
|
type of transactional proxies are created for classes annotated with |
|
the <interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> annotation. If |
|
<literal>proxy-target-class</literal> attribute is set to |
|
<literal>true</literal>, class-based proxies are created. If |
|
<literal>proxy-target-class</literal> is <literal>false</literal> or |
|
if the attribute is omitted, standard JDK interface-based proxies are |
|
created. (See <xref linkend="aop-proxying" /> for a discussion of the |
|
different proxy types.)</para> |
|
</note> |
|
|
|
<note> |
|
<para><literal><tx:annotation-driven/></literal> only looks for |
|
<interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> on beans in the same |
|
application context it is defined in. This means that, if you put |
|
<literal><tx:annotation-driven/></literal> in a |
|
<interfacename>WebApplicationContext</interfacename> for a |
|
<classname>DispatcherServlet</classname>, it only checks for |
|
<interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> beans in your |
|
controllers, and not your services. <!--I don't understand the logic of preceding explanation. Also identify *it* in first sentence of Note. |
|
TR: OK AS IS. "it" refers to <tx:annotation-driven/>-->See <xref |
|
linkend="mvc-servlet" /> for more information.</para> |
|
</note> |
|
|
|
<para>The most derived location takes precedence when evaluating the |
|
transactional settings for a method. <!--Do you need to clarify what *most derived* location means? Lowest level? TR: OK AS IS. following sentence explains it-->In |
|
the case of the following example, the |
|
<classname>DefaultFooService</classname> class is annotated at the class |
|
level with the settings for a read-only transaction, but the |
|
<interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> annotation on the |
|
<methodname>updateFoo(Foo)</methodname> method in the same class takes |
|
precedence over the transactional settings defined at the class |
|
level.</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="java">@Transactional(readOnly = true) |
|
public class DefaultFooService implements FooService { |
|
|
|
public Foo getFoo(String fooName) { |
|
<lineannotation>// do something</lineannotation> |
|
} |
|
|
|
<lineannotation>// <emphasis role="bold">these</emphasis> settings have precedence for this method</lineannotation> |
|
@Transactional(readOnly = false, propagation = Propagation.REQUIRES_NEW) |
|
public void updateFoo(Foo foo) { |
|
<lineannotation>// do something</lineannotation> |
|
} |
|
}</programlisting> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-declarative-attransactional-settings"> |
|
<title><interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> settings</title> |
|
|
|
<para>The <interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> annotation is |
|
metadata that specifies that an interface, class, or method must have |
|
transactional semantics; for example, <quote><emphasis>start a brand |
|
new read-only transaction when this method is invoked, suspending any |
|
existing transaction</emphasis></quote>. The default |
|
<interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> settings are as |
|
follows:</para> |
|
|
|
<itemizedlist> |
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Propagation setting is |
|
<literal>PROPAGATION_REQUIRED.</literal></para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Isolation level is |
|
<literal>ISOLATION_DEFAULT.</literal></para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Transaction is read/write.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Transaction timeout defaults to the default timeout of the |
|
underlying transaction system, or to none if timeouts are not |
|
supported.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Any <exceptionname>RuntimeException</exceptionname> triggers |
|
rollback, and any checked <exceptionname>Exception</exceptionname> |
|
does not.<!--Bullet list above does not exactly map to properties in table.ok? TR: OK AS IS--></para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
</itemizedlist> |
|
|
|
<para>These default settings can be changed; the various properties of |
|
the <interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> annotation are |
|
summarized in the following table:</para> |
|
|
|
<para><table id="tx-attransactional-properties"> |
|
<title><interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> |
|
properties</title> |
|
|
|
<tgroup cols="3"> |
|
<thead> |
|
<row> |
|
<entry>Property</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Type</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Description</entry> |
|
</row> |
|
</thead> |
|
|
|
<tbody> |
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal><link |
|
linkend="tx-multiple-tx-mgrs-with-attransactional">value</link></literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>String</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry> |
|
Optional qualifier specifying the transaction manager to be used. |
|
</entry> |
|
</row> |
|
|
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal><link |
|
linkend="tx-propagation">propagation</link></literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>enum: <classname>Propagation</classname></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Optional propagation setting.</entry> |
|
</row> |
|
|
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal>isolation</literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>enum: <classname>Isolation</classname></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Optional isolation level.</entry> |
|
</row> |
|
|
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal>readOnly</literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>boolean</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Read/write vs. read-only transaction</entry> |
|
</row> |
|
|
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal>timeout</literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>int (in seconds granularity)</entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Transaction timeout.</entry> |
|
</row> |
|
|
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal>rollbackFor</literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Array of <classname>Class</classname> objects, which |
|
must be derived from |
|
<classname>Throwable.</classname></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Optional array of exception classes that <emphasis |
|
role="bold">must</emphasis> cause rollback.</entry> |
|
</row> |
|
|
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal>rollbackForClassname</literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Array of class names. Classes must be derived from |
|
<classname>Throwable.</classname></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Optional array of names of exception classes that |
|
<emphasis role="bold">must</emphasis> cause |
|
rollback.</entry> |
|
</row> |
|
|
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal>noRollbackFor</literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Array of <classname>Class</classname> objects, which |
|
must be derived from |
|
<classname>Throwable.</classname></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Optional array of exception classes that <emphasis |
|
role="bold">must not</emphasis> cause rollback.</entry> |
|
</row> |
|
|
|
<row> |
|
<entry><literal>noRollbackForClassname</literal></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Array of <classname>String</classname> class names, |
|
which must be derived from |
|
<classname>Throwable.</classname></entry> |
|
|
|
<entry>Optional array of names of exception classes that |
|
<emphasis role="bold">must not</emphasis> cause |
|
rollback.</entry> |
|
</row> |
|
</tbody> |
|
</tgroup> |
|
</table></para> |
|
|
|
<para>Currently you cannot have explicit control over the name of a |
|
transaction, where 'name' means the transaction name that will be |
|
shown in a transaction monitor, if applicable (for example, WebLogic's |
|
transaction monitor), and in logging output. For declarative |
|
transactions, the transaction name is always the fully-qualified class |
|
name + "." + <!--Meaning of symbols is unclear. TR: OK AS IS. means concatenation and it would be clear to any programmer reading the docs-->method |
|
name of the transactionally-advised class. For example, if the |
|
<methodname>handlePayment(..)</methodname> method of the |
|
<classname>BusinessService</classname> class started a transaction, |
|
the name of the transaction would be: |
|
<literal>com.foo.BusinessService.handlePayment</literal>.</para> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="tx-multiple-tx-mgrs-with-attransactional"> |
|
<title>Multiple Transaction Managers with <interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename></title> |
|
<para> |
|
Most Spring applications only need a single transaction manager, but there may be situations |
|
where you want multiple independent transaction managers in a single application. |
|
The value attribute of the <interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> annotation can |
|
be used to optionally specify the identity of the <classname>PlatformTransactionManager</classname> |
|
to be used. This can either be the bean name or the qualifier value of the transaction manager bean. |
|
For example, using the qualifier notation, the following Java code |
|
<programlisting language="java"> |
|
public class TransactionalService { |
|
|
|
@Transactional("order") |
|
public void setSomething(String name) { ... } |
|
|
|
@Transactional("account") |
|
public void doSomething() { ... } |
|
} |
|
</programlisting> |
|
could be combined with the following transaction manager bean declarations in the application context. |
|
<programlisting language="xml"><![CDATA[ |
|
<tx:annotation-driven/> |
|
|
|
<bean id="transactionManager1" class="org.springframework.jdbc.DataSourceTransactionManager"> |
|
... |
|
<qualifier value="order"/> |
|
</bean> |
|
|
|
<bean id="transactionManager2" class="org.springframework.jdbc.DataSourceTransactionManager"> |
|
... |
|
<qualifier value="account"/> |
|
</bean> |
|
]]> |
|
</programlisting> |
|
In this case, the two methods on <literal>TransactionalService</literal> will run under separate |
|
transaction managers, differentiated by the "order" and "account" qualifiers. |
|
The default <literal><tx:annotation-driven></literal> target bean name <literal>transactionManager</literal> will |
|
still be used if no specifically qualified PlatformTransactionManager bean is found. |
|
</para> |
|
</section> |
|
<section id="tx-custom-attributes"> |
|
<title>Custom shortcut annotations</title> |
|
<para> |
|
If you find you are repeatedly using the same attributes with <interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> |
|
on many different methods, then Spring's meta-annotation support allows you to define custom shortcut |
|
annotations for your specific use cases. For example, defining the following annotations |
|
<programlisting language="java"> |
|
@Target({ElementType.METHOD, ElementType.TYPE}) |
|
@Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME) |
|
@Transactional("order") |
|
public @interface OrderTx { |
|
} |
|
|
|
@Target({ElementType.METHOD, ElementType.TYPE}) |
|
@Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME) |
|
@Transactional("account") |
|
public @interface AccountTx { |
|
} |
|
</programlisting> |
|
allows us to write the example from the previous section as |
|
<programlisting language="java"> |
|
public class TransactionalService { |
|
|
|
@OrderTx |
|
public void setSomething(String name) { ... } |
|
|
|
@AccountTx |
|
public void doSomething() { ... } |
|
} |
|
</programlisting> |
|
Here we have used the syntax to define the transaction manager qualifier, but could also have |
|
included propagation behavior, rollback rules, timeouts etc. |
|
</para> |
|
</section> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="tx-propagation"> |
|
<title>Transaction propagation</title> |
|
|
|
<!--Changed heading to be more explicit. These are settings, right? |
|
TR: REVISED, PLS REVIEW - changed it back; it's not just settings, the section discusses propagation in general as well as the settings--> |
|
|
|
<para>This section describes some semantics of transaction propagation |
|
in Spring. Please note that this section is not an introduction to |
|
transaction propagation proper; rather it details some of the semantics |
|
regarding transaction propagation in Spring.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>In Spring-managed transactions, be aware of the difference between |
|
<emphasis>physical</emphasis> and <emphasis>logical</emphasis> |
|
transactions, and how the propagation setting applies to this |
|
difference.</para> |
|
|
|
<section id="tx-propagation-required"> |
|
<title>Required</title> |
|
|
|
<para><mediaobject> |
|
<imageobject> |
|
<imagedata align="center" fileref="images/tx_prop_required.png" |
|
format="PNG" /> |
|
</imageobject> |
|
|
|
<caption><para>PROPAGATION_REQUIRED</para></caption> |
|
</mediaobject></para> |
|
|
|
<para>When the propagation setting is |
|
<literal>PROPAGATION_REQUIRED</literal>, a |
|
<emphasis>logical</emphasis> transaction scope is created for each |
|
method upon which the setting is applied. Each such logical |
|
transaction scope can determine rollback-only status individually, |
|
with an outer transaction scope being logically independent from the |
|
inner transaction scope. Of course, in case of standard |
|
<literal>PROPAGATION_REQUIRED</literal> behavior, all these scopes<!--OK? Need to identify *they*. TR: OK AS IS--> |
|
will be mapped to the same physical transaction. So a rollback-only |
|
marker set in the inner transaction scope does affect the outer |
|
transaction's chance to actually commit (as you would expect it |
|
to).<!--Do you need to explain what an inner transaction scope as opposed to an outer transaction scope? TR: OK AS IS--></para> |
|
|
|
<para>However, in the case where an inner transaction scope sets the |
|
rollback-only marker, the outer transaction has not decided on the |
|
rollback itself, and so the rollback (silently triggered by the inner |
|
transaction scope) is unexpected. A corresponding |
|
<classname>UnexpectedRollbackException</classname> is thrown at that |
|
point. This is <emphasis>expected behavior</emphasis> so that the |
|
caller of a transaction can never be misled to assume that a commit |
|
was performed when it really was not. So if an inner transaction (of |
|
which the outer caller is not aware) silently marks a transaction as |
|
rollback-only, the outer caller still calls commit. The outer caller |
|
needs to receive an <classname>UnexpectedRollbackException</classname> |
|
to indicate clearly that a rollback was performed instead.</para> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="tx-propagation-requires_new"> |
|
<title>RequiresNew</title> |
|
|
|
<para><mediaobject> |
|
<imageobject> |
|
<imagedata align="center" |
|
fileref="images/tx_prop_requires_new.png" |
|
format="PNG" /> |
|
</imageobject> |
|
|
|
<caption><para>PROPAGATION_REQUIRES_NEW</para></caption> |
|
</mediaobject></para> |
|
|
|
<para><literal>PROPAGATION_REQUIRES_NEW</literal>, in contrast to |
|
<type>PROPAGATION_REQUIRED</type>, uses a |
|
<emphasis>completely</emphasis> independent transaction for each |
|
affected transaction scope. In that case, the underlying physical |
|
transactions are different and hence can commit or roll back |
|
independently, with an outer transaction not affected by an inner |
|
transaction's rollback status.</para> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="tx-propagation-nested"> |
|
<title>Nested</title> |
|
|
|
<para><literal>PROPAGATION_NESTED</literal> uses a |
|
<emphasis>single</emphasis> physical transaction with multiple |
|
savepoints that it can roll back to. Such partial rollbacks allow an |
|
inner transaction scope to trigger a rollback <emphasis>for its |
|
scope</emphasis>, with the outer transaction being able to continue |
|
the physical transaction despite some operations having been rolled |
|
back. This setting is typically mapped onto JDBC savepoints, so will |
|
only work with JDBC resource transactions. See Spring's |
|
<classname>DataSourceTransactionManager</classname>.</para> |
|
</section> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-declarative-applying-more-than-just-tx-advice"> |
|
<title>Advising transactional operations<!--Need better heading? Executing transactional advice? TR: OK AS IS--></title> |
|
|
|
<para>Suppose you want to execute <emphasis>both</emphasis> |
|
transactional <emphasis>and</emphasis> some basic profiling advice. How |
|
do you effect this in the context of |
|
<literal><tx:annotation-driven/></literal>?</para> |
|
|
|
<para>When you invoke the <methodname>updateFoo(Foo)</methodname> |
|
method, you want to see the following actions:<!--I changed this to a numbered list because language indicated that one thing happens after another. TR: OK--></para> |
|
|
|
<orderedlist> |
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Configured profiling aspect starts up.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Transactional advice executes.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Method on the advised object executes.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Transaction commits.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Profiling aspect reports exact duration of the whole |
|
transactional method invocation.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
</orderedlist> |
|
|
|
<note> |
|
<para>This chapter is not concerned with explaining AOP in any great |
|
detail (except as it applies to transactions). See <xref |
|
linkend="aop" /> for detailed coverage of the following AOP |
|
configuration and AOP in general.</para> |
|
</note> |
|
|
|
<para>Here is the code for a simple profiling aspect discussed above. |
|
<!--If you mean this code produces actions above, say that. TR: REVISED, PLS REVIEW.added 'discussed above'-->The |
|
ordering of advice is controlled through the |
|
<interfacename>Ordered</interfacename> interface. For full details on |
|
advice ordering, see <xref |
|
linkend="aop-ataspectj-advice-ordering" />.</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="java">package x.y; |
|
|
|
import org.aspectj.lang.ProceedingJoinPoint; |
|
import org.springframework.util.StopWatch; |
|
import org.springframework.core.Ordered; |
|
|
|
public class SimpleProfiler implements Ordered { |
|
|
|
private int order; |
|
|
|
<lineannotation>// allows us to control the ordering of advice</lineannotation> |
|
public int getOrder() { |
|
return this.order; |
|
} |
|
|
|
public void setOrder(int order) { |
|
this.order = order; |
|
} |
|
|
|
<lineannotation>// this method <emphasis>is</emphasis> the around advice</lineannotation> |
|
public Object profile(ProceedingJoinPoint call) throws Throwable { |
|
Object returnValue; |
|
StopWatch clock = new StopWatch(getClass().getName()); |
|
try { |
|
clock.start(call.toShortString()); |
|
returnValue = call.proceed(); |
|
} finally { |
|
clock.stop(); |
|
System.out.println(clock.prettyPrint()); |
|
} |
|
return returnValue; |
|
} |
|
} |
|
</programlisting> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="xml"><?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> |
|
<beans xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans" |
|
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" |
|
xmlns:aop="http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop" |
|
xmlns:tx="http://www.springframework.org/schema/tx" |
|
xsi:schemaLocation=" |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans/spring-beans.xsd |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/tx |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/tx/spring-tx.xsd |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop/spring-aop.xsd"> |
|
|
|
<bean id="fooService" class="x.y.service.DefaultFooService"/> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- this is the aspect --></lineannotation> |
|
<bean id="profiler" class="x.y.SimpleProfiler"> |
|
<lineannotation><!-- execute before the transactional advice (hence the lower order number) --></lineannotation> |
|
<property name="order" <emphasis role="bold">value="1"</emphasis>/> |
|
</bean> |
|
|
|
<tx:annotation-driven transaction-manager="txManager" <emphasis |
|
role="bold">order="200"</emphasis>/> |
|
|
|
<aop:config> |
|
<lineannotation><!-- this advice will execute <emphasis role="bold">around</emphasis> the transactional advice --></lineannotation> |
|
<aop:aspect id="profilingAspect" ref="profiler"> |
|
<aop:pointcut id="serviceMethodWithReturnValue" |
|
expression="execution(!void x.y..*Service.*(..))"/> |
|
<aop:around method="profile" pointcut-ref="serviceMethodWithReturnValue"/> |
|
</aop:aspect> |
|
</aop:config> |
|
|
|
<bean id="dataSource" class="org.apache.commons.dbcp.BasicDataSource" destroy-method="close"> |
|
<property name="driverClassName" value="oracle.jdbc.driver.OracleDriver"/> |
|
<property name="url" value="jdbc:oracle:thin:@rj-t42:1521:elvis"/> |
|
<property name="username" value="scott"/> |
|
<property name="password" value="tiger"/> |
|
</bean> |
|
|
|
<bean id="txManager" class="org.springframework.jdbc.datasource.DataSourceTransactionManager"> |
|
<property name="dataSource" ref="dataSource"/> |
|
</bean> |
|
|
|
</beans></programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>The result of the above configuration is a |
|
<literal>fooService</literal> bean that has profiling and transactional |
|
aspects applied to it <emphasis>in the desired order</emphasis>. <!--By *that order,* indicate whether you mean the numbered process or the above example? Or are they the same? |
|
TR: REVISED, PLS REVIEW. changed to 'desired'; seems clear that the desired order is profiling first followed by transactional aspect-->You |
|
configure any number of additional aspects in similar fashion.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>The following example effects the same setup as above, but uses |
|
the purely XML declarative approach.</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="xml"><?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> |
|
<beans xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans" |
|
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" |
|
xmlns:aop="http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop" |
|
xmlns:tx="http://www.springframework.org/schema/tx" |
|
xsi:schemaLocation=" |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans/spring-beans.xsd |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/tx |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/tx/spring-tx.xsd |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop |
|
http://www.springframework.org/schema/aop/spring-aop.xsd"> |
|
|
|
<bean id="fooService" class="x.y.service.DefaultFooService"/> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- the profiling advice --></lineannotation> |
|
<bean id="profiler" class="x.y.SimpleProfiler"> |
|
<lineannotation><!-- execute before the transactional advice (hence the lower order number) --></lineannotation> |
|
<emphasis role="bold"><property name="order" value="1</emphasis>"/> |
|
</bean> |
|
|
|
<aop:config> |
|
|
|
<aop:pointcut id="entryPointMethod" expression="execution(* x.y..*Service.*(..))"/> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- will execute after the profiling advice (c.f. the order attribute) --></lineannotation> |
|
<aop:advisor |
|
advice-ref="txAdvice" |
|
pointcut-ref="entryPointMethod" |
|
<emphasis role="bold">order="2</emphasis>"/> <lineannotation><!-- order value is higher than the profiling aspect --></lineannotation> |
|
|
|
<aop:aspect id="profilingAspect" ref="profiler"> |
|
<aop:pointcut id="serviceMethodWithReturnValue" |
|
expression="execution(!void x.y..*Service.*(..))"/> |
|
<aop:around method="profile" pointcut-ref="serviceMethodWithReturnValue"/> |
|
</aop:aspect> |
|
|
|
</aop:config> |
|
|
|
<tx:advice id="txAdvice" transaction-manager="txManager"> |
|
<tx:attributes> |
|
<tx:method name="get*" read-only="true"/> |
|
<tx:method name="*"/> |
|
</tx:attributes> |
|
</tx:advice> |
|
|
|
<lineannotation><!-- other <bean/> definitions such as a <interfacename>DataSource</interfacename> and a <interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> here --></lineannotation> |
|
|
|
</beans></programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>The result of the above configuration will be a |
|
<literal>fooService</literal> bean that has profiling and transactional |
|
aspects applied to it <emphasis>in that order</emphasis>. If you want |
|
the profiling advice to execute <emphasis>after</emphasis> the |
|
transactional advice on the way in, and <emphasis>before</emphasis> the |
|
transactional advice on the way out, then you simply swap the value of |
|
the profiling aspect bean's <literal>order</literal> property so that it |
|
is higher than the transactional advice's order value.<!--Do you mean ...transactional advice *bean's* order value? TR: OK AS IS--></para> |
|
|
|
<para>You configure additional aspects in similar fashion.</para> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-declarative-aspectj"> |
|
<title>Using <interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> with |
|
AspectJ</title> |
|
|
|
<para>It is also possible to use the Spring Framework's |
|
<interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> support outside of a |
|
Spring container by means of an AspectJ aspect. To do so, you first |
|
annotate your classes (and optionally your classes' methods) with the |
|
<interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> annotation, and then you |
|
link (weave) your application with the |
|
<classname>org.springframework.transaction.aspectj.AnnotationTransactionAspect</classname> |
|
defined in the <filename |
|
class="libraryfile">spring-aspects.jar</filename> file. The aspect must |
|
also be configured with a transaction manager. You can of course use the |
|
Spring Framework's IoC container to take care of dependency-injecting |
|
the aspect. The simplest way to configure the transaction management |
|
aspect is to use the <literal><tx:annotation-driven/></literal> |
|
element and specify the <literal>mode</literal> attribute to |
|
<literal>aspectj</literal> as described in <xref |
|
linkend="transaction-declarative-annotations" />. Because we're focusing |
|
here on applications running outside of a Spring container, we'll show |
|
you how to do it programmatically.</para> |
|
|
|
<note> |
|
<para>Prior to continuing, you may want to read <xref |
|
linkend="transaction-declarative-annotations" /> and <xref |
|
linkend="aop" /> respectively.</para> |
|
</note> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="java"><lineannotation>// construct an appropriate transaction manager </lineannotation> |
|
DataSourceTransactionManager txManager = new DataSourceTransactionManager(getDataSource()); |
|
|
|
<lineannotation>// configure the <classname>AnnotationTransactionAspect</classname> to use it; this must be done before executing any transactional methods</lineannotation> |
|
AnnotationTransactionAspect.aspectOf().setTransactionManager(txManager); </programlisting> |
|
|
|
<note> |
|
<para>When using this aspect, you must annotate the |
|
<emphasis>implementation</emphasis> class (and/or methods within that |
|
class), <emphasis>not</emphasis> the interface (if any) that the class |
|
implements. AspectJ follows Java's rule that annotations on interfaces |
|
are <emphasis>not inherited</emphasis>.</para> |
|
</note> |
|
|
|
<para>The <interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> annotation on a |
|
class specifies the default transaction semantics for the execution of |
|
any method in the class.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>The <interfacename>@Transactional</interfacename> annotation on a |
|
method within the class overrides the default transaction semantics |
|
given by the class annotation (if present). Any method may be annotated, |
|
regardless of visibility.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>To weave your applications with the |
|
<classname>AnnotationTransactionAspect</classname> you must either build |
|
your application with AspectJ (see the <ulink |
|
url="http://www.eclipse.org/aspectj/doc/released/devguide/index.html">AspectJ |
|
Development Guide</ulink>) or use load-time weaving. See <xref |
|
linkend="aop-aj-ltw" /> for a discussion of load-time weaving with |
|
AspectJ.</para> |
|
</section> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-programmatic"> |
|
<title>Programmatic transaction management</title> |
|
|
|
<para>The Spring Framework provides two means of programmatic transaction |
|
management:</para> |
|
|
|
<itemizedlist> |
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Using the <classname>TransactionTemplate</classname>.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para>Using a |
|
<interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> |
|
implementation directly.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
</itemizedlist> |
|
|
|
<para>The Spring team generally recommends the |
|
<classname>TransactionTemplate</classname> for programmatic transaction |
|
management. The second approach is similar to using the JTA |
|
<interfacename>UserTransaction</interfacename> API, although exception |
|
handling is less cumbersome.</para> |
|
|
|
<section id="tx-prog-template"> |
|
<title>Using the <classname>TransactionTemplate</classname></title> |
|
|
|
<para>The <classname>TransactionTemplate</classname> adopts the same |
|
approach as other Spring <emphasis>templates</emphasis> such as the |
|
<classname>JdbcTemplate</classname>. It uses a callback approach, to |
|
free application code from having to do the boilerplate acquisition and |
|
release of transactional resources, and results in code that is |
|
intention driven, in that the code that is written focuses solely on |
|
what the developer wants to do.</para> |
|
|
|
<note> |
|
<para>As you will see in the examples that follow, using the |
|
<classname>TransactionTemplate</classname> absolutely couples you to |
|
Spring's transaction infrastructure and APIs. Whether or not |
|
programmatic transaction management is suitable for your development |
|
needs is a decision that you will have to make yourself.</para> |
|
</note> |
|
|
|
<para>Application code that must execute in a transactional context, and |
|
that will use the <classname>TransactionTemplate</classname> explicitly, |
|
looks like the following. You, as an application developer, write a |
|
<interfacename>TransactionCallback</interfacename> implementation |
|
(typically expressed as an anonymous inner class) that contains the code |
|
that you need to execute in the context of a transaction. You then pass |
|
an instance of your custom |
|
<interfacename>TransactionCallback</interfacename> to the |
|
<methodname>execute(..)</methodname> method exposed on the |
|
<classname>TransactionTemplate</classname>.</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="java">public class SimpleService implements Service { |
|
|
|
<lineannotation>// single <classname>TransactionTemplate</classname> shared amongst all methods in this instance</lineannotation> |
|
private final TransactionTemplate transactionTemplate; |
|
|
|
<lineannotation>// use constructor-injection to supply the <interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename></lineannotation> |
|
public SimpleService(PlatformTransactionManager transactionManager) { |
|
Assert.notNull(transactionManager, "The 'transactionManager' argument must not be null."); |
|
this.transactionTemplate = new TransactionTemplate(transactionManager); |
|
} |
|
|
|
public Object someServiceMethod() { |
|
return transactionTemplate.execute(new TransactionCallback() { |
|
|
|
<lineannotation>// the code in this method executes in a transactional context</lineannotation> |
|
public Object doInTransaction(TransactionStatus status) { |
|
updateOperation1(); |
|
return resultOfUpdateOperation2(); |
|
} |
|
}); |
|
} |
|
}</programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>If there is no return value, use the convenient |
|
<classname>TransactionCallbackWithoutResult</classname> class with an |
|
anonymous class as follows:</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="java">transactionTemplate.execute(new <emphasis |
|
role="bold">TransactionCallbackWithoutResult</emphasis>() { |
|
|
|
protected void doInTransactionWithoutResult(TransactionStatus status) { |
|
updateOperation1(); |
|
updateOperation2(); |
|
} |
|
});</programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>Code within the callback can roll the transaction back by calling |
|
the <literal>setRollbackOnly()</literal> method on the supplied |
|
<interfacename>TransactionStatus</interfacename> object:</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="java">transactionTemplate.execute(new TransactionCallbackWithoutResult() { |
|
|
|
protected void doInTransactionWithoutResult(TransactionStatus status) { |
|
try { |
|
updateOperation1(); |
|
updateOperation2(); |
|
} catch (SomeBusinessExeption ex) { |
|
<emphasis role="bold">status.setRollbackOnly();</emphasis> |
|
} |
|
} |
|
});</programlisting> |
|
|
|
<section id="tx-prog-template-settings"> |
|
<title>Specifying transaction settings</title> |
|
|
|
<para>You can specify transaction settings such as the propagation |
|
mode, the isolation level, the timeout, and so forth on the |
|
<classname>TransactionTemplate</classname> either programmatically or |
|
in configuration. <classname>TransactionTemplate</classname> instances |
|
by default have the <link |
|
linkend="transaction-declarative-txadvice-settings">default |
|
transactional settings</link>. The following example shows the |
|
programmatic customization of the transactional settings for a |
|
specific <classname>TransactionTemplate:</classname></para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="java">public class SimpleService implements Service { |
|
|
|
private final TransactionTemplate transactionTemplate; |
|
|
|
public SimpleService(PlatformTransactionManager transactionManager) { |
|
Assert.notNull(transactionManager, "The 'transactionManager' argument must not be null."); |
|
this.transactionTemplate = new TransactionTemplate(transactionManager); |
|
|
|
<lineannotation>// the transaction settings can be set here explicitly if so desired</lineannotation> |
|
this.transactionTemplate.setIsolationLevel(TransactionDefinition.ISOLATION_READ_UNCOMMITTED); |
|
this.transactionTemplate.setTimeout(30); <lineannotation>// 30 seconds</lineannotation> |
|
<lineannotation>// and so forth...</lineannotation> |
|
} |
|
}</programlisting> |
|
|
|
<para>The following example defines a |
|
<classname>TransactionTemplate</classname> with some custom |
|
transactional settings, using Spring XML configuration. The |
|
<literal>sharedTransactionTemplate</literal> can then be injected into |
|
as many services as are required.</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="xml"><bean id="sharedTransactionTemplate" |
|
class="org.springframework.transaction.support.TransactionTemplate"> |
|
<property name="isolationLevelName" value="ISOLATION_READ_UNCOMMITTED"/> |
|
<property name="timeout" value="30"/> |
|
</bean>"</programlisting> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<para>Finally, instances of the |
|
<classname>TransactionTemplate</classname> class are threadsafe, in that |
|
instances do not maintain any conversational state. |
|
<classname>TransactionTemplate</classname> instances |
|
<emphasis>do</emphasis> however maintain configuration state, so while a |
|
number of classes may share a single instance of a |
|
<classname>TransactionTemplate</classname>, if a class needs to use a |
|
<classname>TransactionTemplate</classname> with different settings (for |
|
example, a different isolation level), then you need to create two |
|
distinct <classname>TransactionTemplate</classname> instances.</para> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-programmatic-ptm"> |
|
<title>Using the |
|
<interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename></title> |
|
|
|
<para>You can also use the |
|
<interfacename>org.springframework.transaction.PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> |
|
directly to manage your transaction. Simply pass the implementation of |
|
the <interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> you are |
|
using to your bean through a bean reference. Then, using the |
|
<interfacename>TransactionDefinition</interfacename> and |
|
<interfacename>TransactionStatus</interfacename> objects you can |
|
initiate transactions, roll back, and commit.</para> |
|
|
|
<programlisting language="java">DefaultTransactionDefinition def = new DefaultTransactionDefinition(); |
|
<lineannotation>// explicitly setting the transaction name is something that can only be done programmatically</lineannotation> |
|
def.setName("SomeTxName"); |
|
def.setPropagationBehavior(TransactionDefinition.PROPAGATION_REQUIRED); |
|
|
|
TransactionStatus status = txManager.getTransaction(def); |
|
try { |
|
<lineannotation>// execute your business logic here</lineannotation> |
|
} |
|
catch (MyException ex) { |
|
txManager.rollback(status); |
|
throw ex; |
|
} |
|
txManager.commit(status);</programlisting> |
|
</section> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="tx-decl-vs-prog"> |
|
<title>Choosing between programmatic and declarative transaction |
|
management</title> |
|
|
|
<para>Programmatic transaction management is usually a good idea only if |
|
you have a small number of transactional operations. For example, if you |
|
have a web application that require transactions only for certain update |
|
operations, you may not want to set up transactional proxies using Spring |
|
or any other technology. In this case, using the |
|
<classname>TransactionTemplate</classname> <emphasis>may</emphasis> be a |
|
good approach. Being able to set the transaction name explicitly is also |
|
something that can only be done using the programmatic approach to |
|
transaction management.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>On the other hand, if your application has numerous transactional |
|
operations, declarative transaction management is usually worthwhile. It |
|
keeps transaction management out of business logic, and is not difficult |
|
to configure. When using the Spring Framework, rather than EJB CMT, the |
|
configuration cost of declarative transaction management is greatly |
|
reduced.</para> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-application-server-integration"> |
|
<title>Application server-specific integration</title> |
|
|
|
<para>Spring's transaction abstraction generally is application server |
|
agnostic. Additionally, Spring's |
|
<classname>JtaTransactionManager</classname> class, which can optionally |
|
perform a JNDI lookup for the JTA |
|
<interfacename>UserTransaction</interfacename> and |
|
<interfacename>TransactionManager</interfacename> objects, autodetects the |
|
location for the latter object, which varies by application server. Having |
|
access to the JTA <interfacename>TransactionManager</interfacename> allows |
|
for enhanced transaction semantics, in particular supporting transaction |
|
suspension. See the <classname>JtaTransactionManager</classname> Javadocs |
|
for details.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>Spring's <classname>JtaTransactionManager</classname> is the |
|
standard choice to run on Java EE application servers, and is known to |
|
work on all common servers. Advanced functionality such as transaction |
|
suspension works on many servers as well -- including GlassFish, JBoss, |
|
Geronimo, and Oracle OC4J -- without any special configuration required. |
|
However, for fully supported transaction suspension and further advanced |
|
integration, Spring ships special adapters for IBM WebSphere, BEA WebLogic |
|
Server, and Oracle OC4J. These adapters are discussed in the following |
|
sections.</para> |
|
|
|
<para><emphasis>For standard scenarios, including WebLogic Server, |
|
WebSphere and OC4J, consider using the convenient |
|
<literal><tx:jta-transaction-manager/></literal> configuration |
|
element.</emphasis> When configured, this element automatically detects |
|
the underlying server and chooses the best transaction manager available |
|
for the platform. This means that you won't have to configure |
|
server-specific adapter classes (as discussed in the following sections) |
|
explicitly; rather, they are chosen automatically, with the standard |
|
<classname>JtaTransactionManager</classname> as default fallback.</para> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-application-server-integration-websphere"> |
|
<title>IBM WebSphere</title> |
|
|
|
<para>On WebSphere 6.1.0.9 and above, the recommended Spring JTA |
|
transaction manager to use is |
|
<classname>WebSphereUowTransactionManager</classname>. This special |
|
adapter leverages IBM's <interfacename>UOWManager</interfacename> API, |
|
which is available in WebSphere Application Server 6.0.2.19 and later |
|
and 6.1.0.9 and later. With this adapter, Spring-driven transaction |
|
suspension (suspend/resume as initiated by |
|
<literal>PROPAGATION_REQUIRES_NEW</literal>) is officially supported by |
|
IBM!</para> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-application-server-integration-weblogic"> |
|
<title>BEA WebLogic Server</title> |
|
|
|
<para>On WebLogic Server 9.0 or above, you typically would use the |
|
<classname>WebLogicJtaTransactionManager</classname> instead of the |
|
stock <classname>JtaTransactionManager</classname> class. This special |
|
WebLogic-specific subclass of the normal |
|
<classname>JtaTransactionManager</classname> supports the full power of |
|
Spring's transaction definitions in a WebLogic-managed transaction |
|
environment, beyond standard JTA semantics: Features include transaction |
|
names, per-transaction isolation levels, and proper resuming of |
|
transactions in all cases.</para> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-application-server-integration-oc4j"> |
|
<title>Oracle OC4J</title> |
|
|
|
<para>Spring ships a special adapter class for OC4J 10.1.3 or later |
|
called <classname>OC4JJtaTransactionManager</classname>. This class is |
|
analogous to the <classname>WebLogicJtaTransactionManager</classname> |
|
class discussed in the previous section, providing similar value-adds on |
|
OC4J: transaction names and per-transaction isolation levels.</para> |
|
|
|
<para>The full JTA functionality, including transaction suspension, |
|
works fine with Spring's <classname>JtaTransactionManager</classname> on |
|
OC4J as well. The special |
|
<classname>OC4JJtaTransactionManager</classname> adapter simply provides |
|
value-adds beyond standard JTA.</para> |
|
</section> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-solutions-to-common-problems"> |
|
<title>Solutions to common problems</title> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-solutions-to-common-problems-wrong-ptm"> |
|
<title>Use of the wrong transaction manager for a specific |
|
<interfacename>DataSource</interfacename></title> |
|
|
|
<para>Use the <emphasis>correct</emphasis> |
|
<interfacename>PlatformTransactionManager</interfacename> implementation |
|
based on your choice of transactional technologies and requirements.<!--for *what* requirements? Identify *their* TR: REVISED, PLS REVIEW.Clarified this a bit.--> |
|
Used properly, the Spring Framework merely provides a straightforward |
|
and portable abstraction. If you are using global transactions, you |
|
<emphasis>must</emphasis> use the |
|
<classname>org.springframework.transaction.jta.JtaTransactionManager</classname> |
|
class (or an <link |
|
linkend="transaction-application-server-integration">application |
|
server-specific subclass</link> of it) for all your transactional |
|
operations. Otherwise the transaction infrastructure attempts to perform |
|
local transactions on resources such as container |
|
<interfacename>DataSource</interfacename> instances. Such local |
|
transactions do not make sense, and a good application server treats |
|
them as errors.</para> |
|
</section> |
|
</section> |
|
|
|
<section id="transaction-resources"> |
|
<title>Further Resources</title> |
|
|
|
<para>For more information about the Spring Framework's transaction |
|
support:</para> |
|
|
|
<itemizedlist> |
|
<listitem> |
|
<para><ulink |
|
url="http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/jw-01-2009/jw-01-spring-transactions.html">Distributed |
|
transactions in Spring, with and without XA</ulink> is a JavaWorld |
|
presentation in which SpringSource's David Syer guides you through |
|
seven patterns for distributed transactions in Spring applications, |
|
three of them with XA and four without.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
|
|
<listitem> |
|
<para><ulink url="http://www.infoq.com/minibooks/JTDS">Java |
|
Transaction Design Strategies</ulink> is a book available from <ulink |
|
url="http://www.infoq.com/">InfoQ</ulink> that provides a well-paced |
|
introduction to transactions in Java. It also includes side-by-side |
|
examples of how to configure and use transactions with both the Spring |
|
Framework and EJB3.</para> |
|
</listitem> |
|
</itemizedlist> |
|
</section> |
|
</chapter>
|
|
|