Transaction Service Avatar
  1. OMG Specification

Transaction Service — Open Issues

  • Acronym: TRANS
  • Issues Count: 50
  • Description: Issues not resolved
Open Closed All
Issues not resolved

Issues Summary

Key Issue Reported Fixed Disposition Status
TRANS14-59 Current set_timeout clarification TRANS 1.0 open
TRANS14-58 checked/unchecked transaction behaviour TRANS 1.0 open
TRANS14-57 Current.timeout part of service context? TRANS 1.0 open
TRANS14-56 Subtransactions question TRANS 1.0 open
TRANS14-55 Question about CosTransactions behaviour TRANS 1.0 open
TRANS14-54 Synchronizations in nested transactions TRANS 1.0 open
TRANS14-53 Possible problem with attributes TRANS 1.0 open
TRANS14-52 namespace collision? TRANS 1.0 open
TRANS14-51 Possible namespace collision in OTS idl TRANS 1.0 open
TRANS14-50 Rollback and heuristics (problem in final draft 4) TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-49 implicit propagation of context vs. CORBA v2 IIOP header TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-48 Question on TransactionFactory::recreate operation TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-47 More IDL circularities TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-46 IDL Circularities in Draft 3 OTS spec TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-45 Coordinator::get_txcontext() TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-44 OTS v2 Synchronization TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-43 Propagation on terminator methods TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-42 Accessing Transaction Service TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-41 Object Identity and Transaction Service TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-40 Optimizing Registration between transaction service domains TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-39 Importing a transaction TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-38 Provide an interface for interposition TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-37 Remove the ORB exceptions added by Transactions Service TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-36 Remove the CORBA standard exceptions TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-34 INV_OBJREV and UNKNOWN TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-33 Transaction Context propagation TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-30 Contention between the use of Current w/security TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-29 repeated COMM_FAILURE TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-28 Getting CosTransactions::NotPrepared when committing TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-35 is_equivalent TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-32 Problems with get_status TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-31 prepare() signature changes TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-27 Getting CORBA::TransactionsRolledBack when committing TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-24 Resource commit failure after votecommit TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-23 Question on replay_completion TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-22 Failure sending rollback() to resource TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-26 Receiving commit() after voting VoteRollback TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-25 commit_one_phase() danger TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-21 hash_transaction() ranges TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-20 OTID format TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-13 OTS Interoperability problems TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-12 Conflict on commit_one_phase exceptions TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-15 Object Caching Problem TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-14 Status enum clarification TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-19 hash_transaction() TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-18 Two-way implicit propagation TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-17 Transaction status TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-16 RecoveryCoordinator question TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-11 HeuristicHazard exception on commit_one_phase TRANS 1.0b1 open
TRANS14-10 Wrong Transaction on get_next_response TRANS 1.0 open

Issues Descriptions

Current set_timeout clarification

  • Key: TRANS14-59
  • Legacy Issue Number: 816
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: There may be a requirement to clarify description of the set_timeout method of Current.The description in the spec. isn"t too clear on this and could be read as a "global" setting of tieouts

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0 — Thu, 27 Nov 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

checked/unchecked transaction behaviour

  • Key: TRANS14-58
  • Legacy Issue Number: 775
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Chapter 10.4.3 (page 10-32 explains the concept of checked transaction behaviour. The opposite concept, unchecked transaction behaviour does not make sense.. It may not ensure the ACID properties of a transaction. Please clarify

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0 — Wed, 29 Oct 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Current.timeout part of service context?

  • Key: TRANS14-57
  • Legacy Issue Number: 773
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Is the Current.timeout part of the service context? If not, how does one set the timeout on subtransactions? If so, how does the server retrieve this information (Current::get_timeout() doesn"t exist).

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0 — Tue, 14 Oct 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Subtransactions question

  • Key: TRANS14-56
  • Legacy Issue Number: 772
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: What happens if the transaction service does not support subtransactions and the following Java code is executed (find code in corresponding archive file)The create call in the TransactionFactory receives current (non-null) transaction in the service context. Should it ignore the current transaction and create another (flat) transaction?

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0 — Tue, 14 Oct 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Question about CosTransactions behaviour

  • Key: TRANS14-55
  • Legacy Issue Number: 771
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: What exception should be raised if the following Java code is executed? <find example in corresponding archive file> Resume should not raise an exception when passed a (possibly) invalid control object. However, commit must fail.

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0 — Tue, 14 Oct 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Synchronizations in nested transactions

  • Key: TRANS14-54
  • Legacy Issue Number: 652
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: What should be done if a user calls register_synchronization on a nested action Coordinator. You could raise one of the standard exceptions but some explicit text would be useful

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0 — Tue, 5 Aug 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Possible problem with attributes

  • Key: TRANS14-53
  • Legacy Issue Number: 631
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: usinng explicit transaction propagation, the OTS spec says that programmer must modify signatures of interface mmethods to take transaction context as parameter. How does it work with attributes

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0 — Mon, 21 Jul 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

namespace collision?

  • Key: TRANS14-52
  • Legacy Issue Number: 625
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Complaiints about PropagationContext Structure in draft3/draft4 CosTransactions module. Error: case of current does not match Current

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0 — Thu, 3 Jul 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Possible namespace collision in OTS idl

  • Key: TRANS14-51
  • Legacy Issue Number: 582
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: This possible collision occurs in the TransIdentity struct. The same problem occurs in the Synchronization interface. ORBs complain that status is redefined

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0 — Mon, 9 Jun 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Rollback and heuristics (problem in final draft 4)

  • Key: TRANS14-50
  • Legacy Issue Number: 500
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Resource operation rollback can raise HeuristicCommit, HeuristicMixed, and HeuristicHazard. Rollback operation on Current and the terminator cannot raise heuristic exceptions at al

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Mon, 17 Feb 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

implicit propagation of context vs. CORBA v2 IIOP header

  • Key: TRANS14-49
  • Legacy Issue Number: 483
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: CORBA v2 spec appears to have added a slot in IIOP request header for sending transaction context. Which one should OTS spec reference? Do ORBs have to support both?

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Thu, 30 Jan 1997 05:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Question on TransactionFactory::recreate operation

  • Key: TRANS14-48
  • Legacy Issue Number: 474
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Two statements in description of this operation under 10.3.2 are contradictory

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Fri, 13 Dec 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

More IDL circularities

  • Key: TRANS14-47
  • Legacy Issue Number: 463
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Draft 3 spec has another circularity between CosTransactions & CosTSInterpretation.New "recreate" operation of CosTransactions::PropagationContext parameter is leading to it.

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Tue, 12 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

IDL Circularities in Draft 3 OTS spec

  • Key: TRANS14-46
  • Legacy Issue Number: 461
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: There is a circularity that exists between the Coordinator & PropagationContext interfaces. This cannot be resolved.

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Tue, 10 Dec 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Coordinator::get_txcontext()

  • Key: TRANS14-45
  • Legacy Issue Number: 305
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Coordinator is created by the transaction factory"s create() method. Transaction factory isn"t declared to inherit from TransactionalObject.How does Coordinator::get_txcontext() work?

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Tue, 29 Oct 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

OTS v2 Synchronization

  • Key: TRANS14-44
  • Legacy Issue Number: 304
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Discussion about synchronization interface, added in latest draft of OTS spec. Should the described set of problems be addressed in current level of the spec?(/archives/issues/issue304)

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Thu, 31 Oct 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Propagation on terminator methods

  • Key: TRANS14-43
  • Legacy Issue Number: 302
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Coordinator, TransactionFactory, Terminator, Control are all in same boat. Terminator object not transactional since it doesn"t inherit from CosTransactions::TransactionalObject..True??

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Mon, 4 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Accessing Transaction Service

  • Key: TRANS14-42
  • Legacy Issue Number: 301
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: CORBA2.0 spec (sec. 7.6) refers to initial reference mechanism to get access to services and states the service will state whether it will respond to resolve_initial_references.-No statement

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Mon, 4 Nov 1996 05:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Object Identity and Transaction Service

  • Key: TRANS14-41
  • Legacy Issue Number: 299
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Importance of the object identity issue

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Tue, 22 Oct 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Optimizing Registration between transaction service domains

  • Key: TRANS14-40
  • Legacy Issue Number: 289
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary:

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Mon, 21 Oct 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Importing a transaction

  • Key: TRANS14-39
  • Legacy Issue Number: 288
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Importing a transaction from the procedural domain into the CORBA Transaction service

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Mon, 21 Oct 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Provide an interface for interposition

  • Key: TRANS14-38
  • Legacy Issue Number: 287
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary:

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Mon, 21 Oct 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Remove the ORB exceptions added by Transactions Service

  • Key: TRANS14-37
  • Legacy Issue Number: 286
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Remove the ORB exceptions added by the Transactions Service and add them to the CORBA specification

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Mon, 21 Oct 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Remove the CORBA standard exceptions

  • Key: TRANS14-36
  • Legacy Issue Number: 285
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Remove the CORBA standard exceptions added by the Transaction Service and add them to the CORBA specification

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Mon, 21 Oct 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

INV_OBJREV and UNKNOWN

  • Key: TRANS14-34
  • Legacy Issue Number: 182
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: C. Wood mentioned in OTS spec Sec 10.5.1 the wording about StExcep::INV_OBJREV and StEXcep::UNKNOWN is replaced by CORBA 2.0 spec"s CORBA::OBJECT_NOT_EXIST exception->confirmation???

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Mon, 7 Oct 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Transaction Context propagation

  • Key: TRANS14-33
  • Legacy Issue Number: 139
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The OTS spec seems ambiguous as to what happens to the transaction context when a message is sent to a non-transactional object within a COS transaction.

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Mon, 30 Sep 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Contention between the use of Current w/security

  • Key: TRANS14-30
  • Legacy Issue Number: 124
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: CORBAsecurity made it so that the Current pseudo object is obtains from ORB::get_current, while the C mapping allows in-line creation. Might transactions change to be like security?

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Mon, 23 Sep 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

repeated COMM_FAILURE

  • Key: TRANS14-29
  • Legacy Issue Number: 122
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: What is to be done in cases involving previously votecommitted resources that have lost contact with the coordinator?

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Mon, 23 Sep 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Getting CosTransactions::NotPrepared when committing

  • Key: TRANS14-28
  • Legacy Issue Number: 121
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: What should we do if we get a CosTransactions::NotPrepared exception back when committing a resource, when all resources were prepared before?

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Thu, 26 Sep 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

is_equivalent

  • Key: TRANS14-35
  • Legacy Issue Number: 183
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The CORBA object model asserts that an object may have more than one reference. Two object references whichdenote same CORBA object may not necessarily compare equal

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Thu, 10 Oct 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Problems with get_status

  • Key: TRANS14-32
  • Legacy Issue Number: 136
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: There are several problems related to insisting that the "ed" ending means the completion of a transaction stage (preparED, committED, rollEDback).

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Thu, 26 Sep 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

prepare() signature changes

  • Key: TRANS14-31
  • Legacy Issue Number: 135
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: There is an IDL signature change in OTS 1.1: prepare() can raise HeuristicHazard and HeuristicMixed conditions.

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Thu, 26 Sep 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Getting CORBA::TransactionsRolledBack when committing

  • Key: TRANS14-27
  • Legacy Issue Number: 120
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: What should we do when we are committing a resource, and get CORBA::TransactionsRolledBack exception from it?

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Mon, 23 Sep 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Resource commit failure after votecommit

  • Key: TRANS14-24
  • Legacy Issue Number: 103
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: What should a resource raise if it first voted votecommit, but later finds out it cannot commit in the commit() function. HeuristicRollback? Also, what if the commit fails partway?

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Fri, 6 Sep 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Question on replay_completion

  • Key: TRANS14-23
  • Legacy Issue Number: 102
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Why is there no mention of the exception StExcep:OBJECT_NOT_EXIST, and why are INV_OBJREF and UNKNOWN used instead?

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Fri, 6 Sep 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Failure sending rollback() to resource

  • Key: TRANS14-22
  • Legacy Issue Number: 99
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: If a client tells a terminator to rollback a transaction, and during rollback the coordinator it cannot contact a resource object, what should it do?

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Fri, 6 Sep 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Receiving commit() after voting VoteRollback

  • Key: TRANS14-26
  • Legacy Issue Number: 119
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: What should an implementation do if a resource receives a commit() call after voting VoteRollback previously?

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Mon, 23 Sep 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

commit_one_phase() danger

  • Key: TRANS14-25
  • Legacy Issue Number: 118
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: If a top level commit sees there is only one resource it controls, and decides to use commit_one_phase() on it. If it returns COMM_FAILURE we don"t know if it committed or rolled back.

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Mon, 23 Sep 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

hash_transaction() ranges

  • Key: TRANS14-21
  • Legacy Issue Number: 72
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: hash_transaction only allows a single range of hash values – this range should be such that it can be customized.

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Tue, 13 Aug 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

OTID format

  • Key: TRANS14-20
  • Legacy Issue Number: 71
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: How does the bequal_length in the otid_id differ from the bqual_length in the X/Open XID definition? Alsom why is gtrid dropped in the otid_id structure?

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Tue, 13 Aug 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

OTS Interoperability problems

  • Key: TRANS14-13
  • Legacy Issue Number: 48
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The OTS specification has interoperability problems: for example, co-ordinators from different implementations trying to communicate, registration of new subordinates.

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Wed, 3 Jul 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Conflict on commit_one_phase exceptions

  • Key: TRANS14-12
  • Legacy Issue Number: 46
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: There is a conflict as to what exceptions commit_one_phase() can raise (p. 10-28 and p. 10-29).

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Tue, 2 Jul 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Object Caching Problem

  • Key: TRANS14-15
  • Legacy Issue Number: 51
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: When a single transaction includes both recoverable objects and procedural database systems, a caching problem between private and system copies of the data can arise.

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Wed, 10 Jul 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Status enum clarification

  • Key: TRANS14-14
  • Legacy Issue Number: 50
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: A detailed explanation of the possible results for get_status on the coordinator object would be helpful.

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Wed, 10 Jul 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

hash_transaction()

  • Key: TRANS14-19
  • Legacy Issue Number: 70
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: Since hash_transaction() returns a single hash code for a transaction, all vendors should ideally use the same algorithm for OTID hashing.

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Tue, 13 Aug 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Two-way implicit propagation

  • Key: TRANS14-18
  • Legacy Issue Number: 67
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: It is not clear if the implicit propagation works in the reply direction as well as the sending direction.

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Mon, 5 Aug 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Transaction status

  • Key: TRANS14-17
  • Legacy Issue Number: 65
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The meaning of the transaction status is not clear.

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Mon, 5 Aug 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

RecoveryCoordinator question

  • Key: TRANS14-16
  • Legacy Issue Number: 54
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: What is the RecoveryCoordinator for? Can"t a resource just send a get_status()?

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Fri, 12 Jul 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

HeuristicHazard exception on commit_one_phase

  • Key: TRANS14-11
  • Legacy Issue Number: 45
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: If this operation raises a HeuristicHazard exception, should the coordinator object send a forget() to the resource object doing the operation?

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0b1 — Tue, 2 Jul 1996 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:20 GMT

Wrong Transaction on get_next_response

  • Key: TRANS14-10
  • Legacy Issue Number: 587
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: How is application supposed to determine which of it"s outstanding requests violated the transaction discipline? Competing request is out parameter-unavailable in event of except

  • Reported: TRANS 1.0 — Tue, 3 Jun 1997 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Sat, 7 Mar 2015 06:24 GMT