[hibernate-dev] JDK 11 Early Access build 15 is available for download.

[Rory O'Donnell]

Hi Sanne,

**JDK 11 EA build 15 , *under both the GPL and Oracle EA licenses, 
is now available at **http://jdk.java.net/11**. **
*

  * Newly approved Schedule, status & features
  o http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk/11/
  * Release Notes:
  o http://jdk.java.net/11/release-notes
  * Summary of changes
  o http://jdk.java.net/11/changes

*Notable changes in JDK 11 EA builds since last email:*

  * b15 - JDK-8201627 
- Kerberos sequence number issues
  * b13 - JDK-8200146 
- Removal of appletviewer launcher
  o deprecated in JDK 9 and has been removed in this release
  * b13 - JDK-8201793 
- java.lang.ref.Reference does not support cloning

**

**

JEPs proposed to target JDK 11 (review ends 2018/05/31 23:00 UTC)

330: Launch Single-File Source-Code Programs


JEPs targeted to JDK 11, so far

309: Dynamic Class-File Constants 
318: Epsilon: A No-Op Garbage Collector

320: Remove the Java EE and CORBA Modules

321: HTTP Client (Standard) 
323: Local-Variable Syntax for Lambda Parameters

324: Key Agreement with Curve25519 and Curve448

327: Unicode 10 
328: Flight Recorder 
329: ChaCha20 and Poly1305 Cryptographic Algorithms


Finally, Initial TLSv1.3 implementation Released to the Open Sandbox. 
Please note well: this branch is under
very active development and is not final by any means. Also note: by 
releasing this code, we are not committing
a specific release or timeframe. We will continue development and fixing 
bugs until the code is ready for inclusion
in the JDK. We welcome your feedback, more info [1]


Regards,
Rory

[1] 
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2018-May/017139.html

-- 
Rgds,Rory O'Donnell
Quality Engineering Manager
Oracle EMEA, Dublin,Ireland

___
hibernate-dev mailing list
hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

[hibernate-dev] Hibernate Search 5.10.1.Final, 5.9.2.Final and 5.6.5.Final released

[Yoann Rodiere]

Hello,

We just published bugfix releases for the branches we actively maintain:
5.10, 5.9 and 5.6.

Check out our blog for more information about these releases:

http://in.relation.to/2018/05/29/hibernate-search-5-10-1-Final-5-9-2-Final-5-6-5-Final/

-- 
Yoann Rodiere
yo...@hibernate.org / yrodi...@redhat.com
Software Engineer
Hibernate NoORM team
___
hibernate-dev mailing list
hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

Re: [hibernate-dev] Breaking JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform backwards compatibility

[Steve Ebersole]

By "non-jpa container managed deployments" you mean injecting Hibernate
Sessions?  Otherwise, I am not sure what this is supposed to mean.  Nor why
it is a differentiator in how we use JtaPlatform / JtaPlatformInitiator.

On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 12:31 PM Scott Marlow  wrote:

> A fix is merged to orm master branch, which should be in 5.3.2, as soon as
> that is available.
>
>
> On Sun, May 27, 2018, 7:06 PM Steve Ebersole  wrote:
>
>> JBossStandalone is meant for use of JBoss Transactions outside of
>> WildFly.  Why are we using it inside WildFly.
>
>
> WildFly also supports non-jpa container managed deployments, that may not
> want to use the JtaPlatformInitiator.  These apps can opt out of the
> JtaPlatformInitiator but will need the correct TX status.
>
> Inside WildFly, jipijapa ought to be defining that however it needs
>> through a custom JtaPlatform and probably the JtaPlatformInitiator.
>>
> We do, by default.
>
>
>>
>> On Sun, May 27, 2018, 3:58 PM Sanne Grinovero 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 27 May 2018 at 15:29, Scott Marlow  wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, May 27, 2018 at 8:17 AM, Sanne Grinovero 
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> On 27 May 2018 at 00:30, Scott Marlow  wrote:
>>> >> > Next idea, we should first look for the WFTC classes, if not found,
>>> then
>>> >> > look for Arjuna classes.
>>> >>
>>> >> +1 that would be nice and I see other implementations e.g.
>>> >> JBossAppServerJtaPlatform have a precedent of attempting multiple
>>> >> strategies to maintain backward compatibility.
>>> >>
>>> >> Created:
>>> >>  - https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/HHH-12640
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-orm/pull/2314
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Regarding the use of the old Arjuna name: you might be right that it
>>> >> shouldn't be used, but it's still very common:
>>> >>
>>> >> even the Narayana quickstarts using Hibernate are broken by this
>>> >> change, and so is any application running on WildFly Swarm or
>>> >> Thorntail.
>>> >>
>>> >> I suppose something should be improved on their side as well, yet we
>>> >> should give people time (by making it compatible like you suggested)
>>> >> and help at least with some documented guidance - the fallback
>>> >> strategy could log a warning to motivate people to update but IMO we
>>> >> should start bugging people with such messages only when the other
>>> >> runtimes and examples ship with the new defaults.
>>> >>
>>> >> Hibernate Search also has integration tests with Narayana (standalone
>>> >> JTA) and it's not clear to me now which dependencies I should be
>>> >> changing; I suppose I'll figure it out soon as I need to release it
>>> >> too :)
>>> >>
>>> >> The user experience after this error is quite bad: applications now
>>> >> simply fail to start with a confusing
>>> >> "javax.persistence.PersistenceException: No Persistence provider for
>>> >> EntityManager named XYZ found", we give no better error and no clue
>>> >> about needing to look into the used transactions implementation.
>>> >>
>>> >> Created:
>>> >>  - https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/HHH-12639
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks,
>>> >> Sanne
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Sat, May 26, 2018, 7:12 PM Scott Marlow 
>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> On Sat, May 26, 2018, 6:05 PM Scott Marlow 
>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> Or, maybe we should just remove the JBOSS_TM_CLASS_NAME +
>>> >> >>> JBOSS_UT_CLASS_NAME class references and instead JNDI lookup
>>> using the
>>> >> >>> standard JBoss TM/UT JNDI names.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> This wouldn't work for standard alone mode, as there wouldn't be
>>> any
>>> >> >> jndi
>>> >> >> services.  Guess, we are stuck with using class name references.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 5:05 PM, Scott Marlow >> >
>>> >> >>> wrote:
>>> >> 
>>> >> 
>>> >>  On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 9:04 AM, Sanne Grinovero
>>> >>  
>>> >>  wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Hi Scott,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I see you changed JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform to use a new API in
>>> >> > WildFly;
>>> >> 
>>> >> 
>>> >>  More that in WildFly 13, applications shouldn't use the Arjuna TM
>>> >>  classes directly anymore.  The WildFly Transaction Client wraps
>>> the
>>> >>  Arjuna
>>> >>  TM and maintains correct TX status.
>>> >> 
>>> >> >
>>> >> > this breaks all existing applications using a generic "JBoss -
>>> >> > standalone" platform which isn't using the very latest WildFly.
>>> >> 
>>> >> 
>>> >>  Hmm, thinking more about this, also broken, are any ORM 5.1.x
>>> >>  applications that depend on JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform to choose
>>> the
>>> >>  WildFly
>>> >>  TM.  JPA container managed applications won't have this problem.
>>> >> 
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I see that in many cases this type is auto-detected - and while
>>> >> > JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform causes an exception this is
>>> swallowed by

Re: [hibernate-dev] Breaking JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform backwards compatibility

[Scott Marlow]

On 05/29/2018 08:48 AM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> By "non-jpa container managed deployments" you mean injecting Hibernate 
> Sessions?  Otherwise, I am not sure what this is supposed to mean.  Nor 
> why it is a differentiator in how we use JtaPlatform / JtaPlatformInitiator.

Applications that deploy on WF, will use the WildFly 
JtaPlatformInitiator, unless they add a persistence unit hint 
"wildfly.jpa.jtaplatform" set to "false", in which case the WildFly 
JtaPlatformInitiator will not be added for the deployment.  We added 
this for allowing applications to have more control over which 
JtaPlatform is used (e.g. they can use an app configured JtaPlatform or 
the determined correct ORM JtaPlatform).

I do see that Hibernate ORM will always succeed to use the 
JBossAppServerJtaPlatform on WF, since we will only try using the 
JBossStandalone if the JNDI lookup of the WF TM fails.

What happens if the deployment, is configured to use 
JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform directly on WF?  I assume they will need to 
switch to use our new WildFlyStandAloneJtaPlatform class on ORM 5.3.2, 
so that the app sees correct JTA TX status?

There is also now the problem that in 5.3.1, JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform 
referred to the WildFly Transaction Client but is now reverted in 5.3.2, 
to only refer to the Arjuna classes.  Perhaps instead in 5.3.2, we 
should delete WildFlyStandAloneJtaPlatform and merge the logic into the 
existing JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform (so that we first check for WildFly 
Transaction Client classes, failing that, we then try the Arjuna classes.)

> 
> On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 12:31 PM Scott Marlow  > wrote:
> 
> A fix is merged to orm master branch, which should be in 5.3.2, as
> soon as that is available.
> 
> 
> On Sun, May 27, 2018, 7:06 PM Steve Ebersole  > wrote:
> 
> JBossStandalone is meant for use of JBoss Transactions outside
> of WildFly.  Why are we using it inside WildFly. 
> 
> 
> WildFly also supports non-jpa container managed deployments, that
> may not want to use the JtaPlatformInitiator.  These apps can opt
> out of the JtaPlatformInitiator but will need the correct TX status.
> 
> Inside WildFly, jipijapa ought to be defining that however it
> needs through a custom JtaPlatform and probably the
> JtaPlatformInitiator.
> 
> We do, by default.
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, May 27, 2018, 3:58 PM Sanne Grinovero
> mailto:sa...@hibernate.org>> wrote:
> 
> On 27 May 2018 at 15:29, Scott Marlow  > wrote:
>  >
>  >
>  > On Sun, May 27, 2018 at 8:17 AM, Sanne Grinovero
> mailto:sa...@hibernate.org>>
>  > wrote:
>  >>
>  >> On 27 May 2018 at 00:30, Scott Marlow
> mailto:smar...@redhat.com>> wrote:
>  >> > Next idea, we should first look for the WFTC classes,
> if not found, then
>  >> > look for Arjuna classes.
>  >>
>  >> +1 that would be nice and I see other implementations e.g.
>  >> JBossAppServerJtaPlatform have a precedent of attempting
> multiple
>  >> strategies to maintain backward compatibility.
>  >>
>  >> Created:
>  >>  - https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/HHH-12640
>  >
>  >
>  > https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-orm/pull/2314
>  >
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> Regarding the use of the old Arjuna name: you might be
> right that it
>  >> shouldn't be used, but it's still very common:
>  >>
>  >> even the Narayana quickstarts using Hibernate are broken
> by this
>  >> change, and so is any application running on WildFly
> Swarm or
>  >> Thorntail.
>  >>
>  >> I suppose something should be improved on their side as
> well, yet we
>  >> should give people time (by making it compatible like
> you suggested)
>  >> and help at least with some documented guidance - the
> fallback
>  >> strategy could log a warning to motivate people to
> update but IMO we
>  >> should start bugging people with such messages only when
> the other
>  >> runtimes and examples ship with the new defaults.
>  >>
>  >> Hibernate Search also has integration tests with
> Narayana (standalone
>  >> JTA) and it's not clear to me now which dependencies I
> should be
>  >> changing; I suppose I'll figure it out soon as I need to
> release it
>  >> too :)
>  >>
>  >> 

Re: [hibernate-dev] Breaking JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform backwards compatibility

[Steve Ebersole]

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 8:38 AM Scott Marlow  wrote:

>
> On 05/29/2018 08:48 AM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> > By "non-jpa container managed deployments" you mean injecting Hibernate
> > Sessions?  Otherwise, I am not sure what this is supposed to mean.  Nor
> > why it is a differentiator in how we use JtaPlatform
> / JtaPlatformInitiator.
>
> Applications that deploy on WF, will use the WildFly
> JtaPlatformInitiator, unless they add a persistence unit hint
> "wildfly.jpa.jtaplatform" set to "false", in which case the WildFly
> JtaPlatformInitiator will not be added for the deployment.  We added
> this for allowing applications to have more control over which
> JtaPlatform is used (e.g. they can use an app configured JtaPlatform or
> the determined correct ORM JtaPlatform).
>

Well that may be how your jipijapa works.  That's not how mine works.  I
really wish we would keep this code in sync, or if you could use
hibernate-jipijapa.  Maybe you mean against 5.1?

Anyway, in hibernate-jipijapa I simply extend the normal
`JtaPlatformInitiator` and override `#getFallbackProvider`.  The way that
should work is that it will prefer any value explicitly set by the user;
but, if they do not specify anything explicitly, I use the "fallback".  At
least that is how it should work - if it does not, I would consider that a
bug and we should fix it.

Or if you mean against 5.1 or an earlier version... the only difference is
the inclusion of the explicit `#getFallbackProvider` hook - you can still
effect the same change simply by fully implementing
`JtaPlatformInitiator#initiateService`


I do see that Hibernate ORM will always succeed to use the
> JBossAppServerJtaPlatform on WF, since we will only try using the
> JBossStandalone if the JNDI lookup of the WF TM fails.
>

Sure, because you are not telling it to do anything different with an
initiator.


What happens if the deployment, is configured to use
> JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform directly on WF?  I assume they will need to
> switch to use our new WildFlyStandAloneJtaPlatform class on ORM 5.3.2,
> so that the app sees correct JTA TX status?
>

Nope, on 5.3 hibernate-jipijapa simply works.  You have problems because
you are not following that paradigm.



> There is also now the problem that in 5.3.1, JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform
> referred to the WildFly Transaction Client but is now reverted in 5.3.2,
> to only refer to the Arjuna classes.  Perhaps instead in 5.3.2, we
> should delete WildFlyStandAloneJtaPlatform and merge the logic into the
> existing JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform (so that we first check for WildFly
> Transaction Client classes, failing that, we then try the Arjuna classes.)
>

I agree that this is a problem and should not have been changed.  At least
without looking.  IMO JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform ought to look for any of
the classes it can use.
___
hibernate-dev mailing list
hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

[hibernate-dev] Hibernate-orm-modules nmartifacts not publish

[Vlad Mihalcea]

I checked this forum question:

https://discourse.hibernate.org/t/org-hibernate-hibernate-orm-modules-no-longer-published/861/2

And, indeed, the Hibernate-orm-modules artefacts are missing from Maven
Central.

Was this intentional or do we have a problem related to publishing them?

Vlad
___
hibernate-dev mailing list
hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

Re: [hibernate-dev] Hibernate-orm-modules nmartifacts not publish

[Chris Cranford]

I believe we renamed it to `hibernate-orm-jbossmodules` in 5.3.0.CR2 as
I see that with 5.3.1.Final too.

On 05/29/2018 10:59 AM, Vlad Mihalcea wrote:
> I checked this forum question:
>
> https://discourse.hibernate.org/t/org-hibernate-hibernate-orm-modules-no-longer-published/861/2
>
> And, indeed, the Hibernate-orm-modules artefacts are missing from Maven
> Central.
>
> Was this intentional or do we have a problem related to publishing them?
>
> Vlad
> ___
> hibernate-dev mailing list
> hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

___
hibernate-dev mailing list
hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

Re: [hibernate-dev] Hibernate-orm-modules nmartifacts not publish

[Vlad Mihalcea]

Thanks. I will have to look if we have some outdated docs pointing to the
old artefact.

On Tue, 29 May 2018, 18:21 Chris Cranford,  wrote:

> I believe we renamed it to `hibernate-orm-jbossmodules` in 5.3.0.CR2 as I
> see that with 5.3.1.Final too.
>
> On 05/29/2018 10:59 AM, Vlad Mihalcea wrote:
>
> I checked this forum question:
> https://discourse.hibernate.org/t/org-hibernate-hibernate-orm-modules-no-longer-published/861/2
>
> And, indeed, the Hibernate-orm-modules artefacts are missing from Maven
> Central.
>
> Was this intentional or do we have a problem related to publishing them?
>
> Vlad
> ___
> hibernate-dev mailing 
> listhibernate-dev@lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
>
>
>
___
hibernate-dev mailing list
hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

Re: [hibernate-dev] Breaking JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform backwards compatibility

[Scott Marlow]

On 05/29/2018 10:05 AM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 8:38 AM Scott Marlow  > wrote:
> 
> 
> On 05/29/2018 08:48 AM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
>  > By "non-jpa container managed deployments" you mean injecting
> Hibernate
>  > Sessions?  Otherwise, I am not sure what this is supposed to
> mean.  Nor
>  > why it is a differentiator in how we use JtaPlatform
> / JtaPlatformInitiator.
> 
> Applications that deploy on WF, will use the WildFly
> JtaPlatformInitiator, unless they add a persistence unit hint
> "wildfly.jpa.jtaplatform" set to "false", in which case the WildFly
> JtaPlatformInitiator will not be added for the deployment.  We added
> this for allowing applications to have more control over which
> JtaPlatform is used (e.g. they can use an app configured JtaPlatform or
> the determined correct ORM JtaPlatform).
> 
> 
> Well that may be how your jipijapa works.  That's not how mine works.  I 
> really wish we would keep this code in sync, or if you could use 
> hibernate-jipijapa.  Maybe you mean against 5.1?

I think we both agreed that for now, we should maintain the jipijapa 
code in WF, with a fork being kept in ORM, for testing and other 
purposes (like making a new ORM version available to already shipped WF 
versions).

I agree that we should sync our copies of this code, just not sure of 
how, other than discussing a comparison and picking which changes should 
be merged to the other copy.

> 
> Anyway, in hibernate-jipijapa I simply extend the normal 
> `JtaPlatformInitiator` and override `#getFallbackProvider`.  The way 
> that should work is that it will prefer any value explicitly set by the 
> user; but, if they do not specify anything explicitly, I use the 
> "fallback".  At least that is how it should work - if it does not, I 
> would consider that a bug and we should fix it.

Interesting, should RegionFactoryInitiator also support automatic 
"fallback" to the user configured region factory?  I assume not since we 
are enabling the second level cache on Hibernate ORM but currently are 
not able to do that in WildFly (as the Infinispan cache needs to be made 
available first).

> 
> Or if you mean against 5.1 or an earlier version... the only difference 
> is the inclusion of the explicit `#getFallbackProvider` hook - you can 
> still effect the same change simply by fully implementing 
> `JtaPlatformInitiator#initiateService`
> 
> 
> I do see that Hibernate ORM will always succeed to use the
> JBossAppServerJtaPlatform on WF, since we will only try using the
> JBossStandalone if the JNDI lookup of the WF TM fails.
> 
> 
> Sure, because you are not telling it to do anything different with an 
> initiator.
> 
> 
> What happens if the deployment, is configured to use
> JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform directly on WF?  I assume they will need to
> switch to use our new WildFlyStandAloneJtaPlatform class on ORM 5.3.2,
> so that the app sees correct JTA TX status?
> 
> 
> Nope, on 5.3 hibernate-jipijapa simply works.  You have problems because 
> you are not following that paradigm.
> 
> There is also now the problem that in 5.3.1, JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform
> referred to the WildFly Transaction Client but is now reverted in
> 5.3.2,
> to only refer to the Arjuna classes.  Perhaps instead in 5.3.2, we
> should delete WildFlyStandAloneJtaPlatform and merge the logic into the
> existing JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform (so that we first check for WildFly
> Transaction Client classes, failing that, we then try the Arjuna
> classes.)
> 
> 
> I agree that this is a problem and should not have been changed.  At 
> least without looking.  IMO JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform ought to look for 
> any of the classes it can use.

I reopened HHH-12640, so we can delete WildFlyStandAloneJtaPlatform and 
have JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform look for any of the classes it can use. 
https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-orm/pull/2317 is the PR for this 
change.
___
hibernate-dev mailing list
hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

Re: [hibernate-dev] Breaking JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform backwards compatibility

[Steve Ebersole]

The implementation from hibernate-jipijapa returns disabling caching at all
if the user did not specify any value.  That was what you wanted to happen
per our discussion at that time.  Really I can make it do whatever you want
- just not sure of a better answer.

Also the point of a "fallback" is what happens when the user does not
explicitly specify.  That is what both the RegionFactoryInitiator and
JtaPlatformInitiator in hibernate-jipijapa do

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 12:49 PM Scott Marlow  wrote:

>
>
> On 05/29/2018 10:05 AM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 8:38 AM Scott Marlow  > > wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 05/29/2018 08:48 AM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> >  > By "non-jpa container managed deployments" you mean injecting
> > Hibernate
> >  > Sessions?  Otherwise, I am not sure what this is supposed to
> > mean.  Nor
> >  > why it is a differentiator in how we use JtaPlatform
> > / JtaPlatformInitiator.
> >
> > Applications that deploy on WF, will use the WildFly
> > JtaPlatformInitiator, unless they add a persistence unit hint
> > "wildfly.jpa.jtaplatform" set to "false", in which case the WildFly
> > JtaPlatformInitiator will not be added for the deployment.  We added
> > this for allowing applications to have more control over which
> > JtaPlatform is used (e.g. they can use an app configured JtaPlatform
> or
> > the determined correct ORM JtaPlatform).
> >
> >
> > Well that may be how your jipijapa works.  That's not how mine works.  I
> > really wish we would keep this code in sync, or if you could use
> > hibernate-jipijapa.  Maybe you mean against 5.1?
>
> I think we both agreed that for now, we should maintain the jipijapa
> code in WF, with a fork being kept in ORM, for testing and other
> purposes (like making a new ORM version available to already shipped WF
> versions).
>
> I agree that we should sync our copies of this code, just not sure of
> how, other than discussing a comparison and picking which changes should
> be merged to the other copy.
>
> >
> > Anyway, in hibernate-jipijapa I simply extend the normal
> > `JtaPlatformInitiator` and override `#getFallbackProvider`.  The way
> > that should work is that it will prefer any value explicitly set by the
> > user; but, if they do not specify anything explicitly, I use the
> > "fallback".  At least that is how it should work - if it does not, I
> > would consider that a bug and we should fix it.
>
> Interesting, should RegionFactoryInitiator also support automatic
> "fallback" to the user configured region factory?  I assume not since we
> are enabling the second level cache on Hibernate ORM but currently are
> not able to do that in WildFly (as the Infinispan cache needs to be made
> available first).
>
> >
> > Or if you mean against 5.1 or an earlier version... the only difference
> > is the inclusion of the explicit `#getFallbackProvider` hook - you can
> > still effect the same change simply by fully implementing
> > `JtaPlatformInitiator#initiateService`
> >
> >
> > I do see that Hibernate ORM will always succeed to use the
> > JBossAppServerJtaPlatform on WF, since we will only try using the
> > JBossStandalone if the JNDI lookup of the WF TM fails.
> >
> >
> > Sure, because you are not telling it to do anything different with an
> > initiator.
> >
> >
> > What happens if the deployment, is configured to use
> > JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform directly on WF?  I assume they will need
> to
> > switch to use our new WildFlyStandAloneJtaPlatform class on ORM
> 5.3.2,
> > so that the app sees correct JTA TX status?
> >
> >
> > Nope, on 5.3 hibernate-jipijapa simply works.  You have problems because
> > you are not following that paradigm.
> >
> > There is also now the problem that in 5.3.1,
> JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform
> > referred to the WildFly Transaction Client but is now reverted in
> > 5.3.2,
> > to only refer to the Arjuna classes.  Perhaps instead in 5.3.2, we
> > should delete WildFlyStandAloneJtaPlatform and merge the logic into
> the
> > existing JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform (so that we first check for
> WildFly
> > Transaction Client classes, failing that, we then try the Arjuna
> > classes.)
> >
> >
> > I agree that this is a problem and should not have been changed.  At
> > least without looking.  IMO JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform ought to look for
> > any of the classes it can use.
>
> I reopened HHH-12640, so we can delete WildFlyStandAloneJtaPlatform and
> have JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform look for any of the classes it can use.
> https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-orm/pull/2317 is the PR for this
> change.
>
___
hibernate-dev mailing list
hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

Re: [hibernate-dev] Is bytecode enhancement enabled by default in 5.3?

[Scott Marlow]

>
> Well based on what you described it sounds to me like there ought to be at
>> least 2 different log events here:
>>
>>  1. The transformer is registered (this could be either WF or Hibernate
>> or both)
>>  2. The transformer calls the Enhancer
>>
>
> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-10456 is for #1 + #2.
>
>  3. (?) Enhancer enhances a class.  Enhancer is an interface though and
>> this would rely on the impls (Javassist and Byte Buddy) to do this.
>>
>>
Created https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/11297 for the WF logging
change.
___
hibernate-dev mailing list
hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

[hibernate-dev] Unidirectional @OneToMany @JoinColumn associations

[Gail Badner]

Unidirectional OneToMany associations using @JoinColumn that reference
columns that are not PK columns is not currently supported.

The JPA 2.1 documentation for @JoinTable says:

"Support for referenced columns that are not primary key columns of the
referenced table is optional. Applications that use such mappings will not
be portable."

I don't see anything in the user doc that explicitly states that Hibernate
does not support this.

Is this considered a bug?

Also, what about a unidirectional OneToMany using a @JoinColumn that
references some, but not all, of primary key columns? Hibernate does not
support that either. Should Hibernate support it since they are primary key
columns?

Thanks,
Gail
___
hibernate-dev mailing list
hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev