<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>











<rss version="2.0" xmlns:jf="http://www.jivesoftware.com/xmlns/jiveforums/rss">



<channel>
    <title>Support Forums: Message List - JBoss Business Activity Framework - for transactional web services</title>
    <link>http://www.theserverside.com</link>
    <description>Most recent forum messages</description>
    <language>en</language>
    
        <generator>Jive Forums Silver 5.5.30 (www.jivesoftware.com)</generator>
    
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 07:14:34 -0400</pubDate>


    <item>

        <title>Re: Why not use store and forward?</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=46557</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[<blockquote>When dealing with long running business processes that potentially cross not just application but also corporate boundaries, the store and forward pattern seems much more appropriate than any form of transactional pattern.<br><br>While I...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2007 17:41:12 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2007 17:41:12 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2007 17:41:12 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Aug 17, 2007</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Mark Little</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Why not use store and forward?</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=46557</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[When dealing with long running business processes that potentially cross not just application but also corporate boundaries, the store and forward pattern seems much more appropriate than any form of transactional pattern....]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2007 15:50:25 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2007 15:50:25 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2007 15:50:25 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Aug 17, 2007</jf:date>
        <jf:author>James Loverde</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>1</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Re: 2 phase commit</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=46557</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[<blockquote>Exactamundo.  It's amazing how often "Transaction" and "Workflow" are conflated.<br><br> - Don</blockquote>...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:49:06 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:49:06 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:49:06 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Aug 16, 2007</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Bill Burke</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Re: 2 phase commit</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=46557</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[As Bill points out that's not always desirable due to resource contention. Besides, lot of times it turns out you can relax the strict ACID requirements and live with it. For example, in a reliable messaging based transaction scenario, your...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 20:21:29 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 20:21:29 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 20:21:29 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Aug 15, 2007</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Satadru Roy</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Re: 2 phase commit</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=46557</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[You may still coordinate it using the provided XTS (XML Transaction Service). The framework is built on top of it. All messages that are sent from the coordinator to services (and the other way round) have to be acknowledged so delivery is also...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:30:38 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:30:38 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:30:38 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Aug 15, 2007</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Maciej Machulak</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Re: 2 phase commit</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=46557</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[Exactamundo.  It's amazing how often "Transaction" and "Workflow" are conflated.

 - Don]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:15:41 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:15:41 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:15:41 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Aug 15, 2007</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Donald Smith</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>1</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Re: 2 phase commit</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=46557</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[<blockquote>Not knowing the specs at all, I'm a bit amazed. Hasn't history already determined that for distributed transactions (based on the title of the article) two phase commits are the better approach as opposed to manual rollbacks? What if the...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:02:37 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:02:37 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:02:37 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Aug 15, 2007</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Bill Burke</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>3</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Re: 2 phase commit</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=46557</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[Here's a blog entry by Mark Little that might...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 06:25:58 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 06:25:58 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 06:25:58 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Aug 15, 2007</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Adrian Brock</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>2 phase commit</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=46557</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[Not knowing the specs at all, I'm a bit amazed. Hasn't history already determined that for distributed transactions (based on the title of the article) two phase commits are the better approach as opposed to manual rollbacks? What if the rollback fails...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 02:42:24 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 02:42:24 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 02:42:24 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Aug 15, 2007</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Tom Eugelink</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>6</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Annotation on parameters</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=46557</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[BTW, beyond the functionality this framework introduces, I think this is a great general example/usecase for annotations on parameters.]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2007 09:24:18 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2007 09:24:18 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2007 09:24:18 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Aug 14, 2007</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Bill Burke</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>7</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>JBoss Business Activity Framework - for transactional web services</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=46557</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[Mark Little's team has been working on support for transactional Web Services (with accordance to the Business Activity model described in the WS-BusinessActivity specification) for some time.  Recently, one of his contributors, Maciej Machulak, wrote an...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2007 05:59:14 -0400</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2007 05:58:52 -0400</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2007 05:59:14 -0400</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Aug 14, 2007</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Bill Burke</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>10</jf:replyCount>
    </item>



</channel>
</rss>

