Transaction propogation to java helper class

Question

          Hi
          EJB A calls EJB B and EJB B does certain numbr of updates/insert. If one them
          fails everything rollsback in second EJB. This works fine.
          But instead of EJB B being an EJB the initial design was a regular java helper
          class. EJB A creates a new instance of this java class and calls a method on this
          class. The EJB A is set to be transactional (Required). The java class get a DB
          connection from TX datasource and does the same operation as EJB B that I described
          above. I tried to throw an exception to the EJB A and catching the Exception did
          a setRollbackOnly() in EJB A and the transaction does not rollback. I was under
          the impression that even if DB operations are done in a java class they are still
          under the same transaction and thus container is still under control of it if
          it is a container managed transaction. it does not look like it is teh case.
          Is there any requirement that DB connection obtained /operation made need to be
          inside the EJB method itself and not in the java helper class. Does this means
          that the transaction gets suspended on the duration of execution of the java helper
          class. I was under the impression that they are all under the same transaction
          context and it applies to that as well. Any help on this is greatly appreciated.
          

Answer 1

Well, that's the only way. The container has to start the transaction in its
          invocation wrapper for CMT EJBs and then terminate the transaction (commit or
          rollback) after the method has exited (either normally or by throwing an
          exception). Anything that happens inside the call to the business method is in
          the transaction...
          --dejan
          Toad wrote:
          > That's good to know but somewhat surprising.
          >
          > "Deyan D. Bektchiev" <[email protected]> wrote in message
          > news:[email protected]...
          > > The transaction is associate with the thread that the EJB method executes
          > in so
          > > any calls in the same threads are part of the transaction.
          > > So even if you have a separate class that functions as a connection
          > factory (in
          > > the end getting the connections from a TX datasource) those connections
          > still
          > > would be part of the transaction.
          > >
          > > You can test that if you do
          > > System.out.println(weblogic.transaction.TxHelper.getTransaction()) and you
          > > should see the current transaction.
          > >
          > >
          > > --dejan
          > >
          > > Toad wrote:
          > >
          > > > I'm thinking the key to the failure to rollback is that the helper bean
          > > > "gets a connection" which is effectively stepping outside the confines
          > of
          > > > your CMP model. How would the container know that you hand-carved a
          > > > connection or even a set of connections and executed several
          > transactions
          > > > independently? That would be no mean feat if it wasn't specifically
          > designed
          > > > in.
          > > >
          > > > "Priya Vasudevan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
          > > > news:[email protected]...
          > > > >
          > > > > Hi
          > > > >
          > > > > EJB A calls EJB B and EJB B does certain numbr of updates/insert. If
          > one
          > > > them
          > > > > fails everything rollsback in second EJB. This works fine.
          > > > >
          > > > > But instead of EJB B being an EJB the initial design was a regular
          > java
          > > > helper
          > > > > class. EJB A creates a new instance of this java class and calls a
          > method
          > > > on this
          > > > > class. The EJB A is set to be transactional (Required). The java class
          > get
          > > > a DB
          > > > > connection from TX datasource and does the same operation as EJB B
          > that I
          > > > described
          > > > > above. I tried to throw an exception to the EJB A and catching the
          > > > Exception did
          > > > > a setRollbackOnly() in EJB A and the transaction does not rollback. I
          > was
          > > > under
          > > > > the impression that even if DB operations are done in a java class
          > they
          > > > are still
          > > > > under the same transaction and thus container is still under control
          > of it
          > > > if
          > > > > it is a container managed transaction. it does not look like it is teh
          > > > case.
          > > > >
          > > > > Is there any requirement that DB connection obtained /operation made
          > need
          > > > to be
          > > > > inside the EJB method itself and not in the java helper class. Does
          > this
          > > > means
          > > > > that the transaction gets suspended on the duration of execution of
          > the
          > > > java helper
          > > > > class. I was under the impression that they are all under the same
          > > > transaction
          > > > > context and it applies to that as well. Any help on this is greatly
          > > > appreciated.
          > > > >
          > >