10 Jan
2011
10 Jan
'11
2:15 p.m.
Hi,
I have been working hard on filesystem attachments and I found that synchronizing manual
filesystem
transactions with automatic database transactions was a difficult job and I needed a new
tool to do
it. So I wrote what I am proposing to be the next XWiki Persistence Engine.
I'll start off with the fun part of the proposal, I have been calling it xwiki-store
so far but I am
so excited about the capabilities of this engine that I don't think it does it justice
to name it
"store" after the place on the corner with milk and eggs. I am proposing it be
named "XWiki
Persistence Engine", the directory will be renamed xwiki-persistence, the artifact
name
xwiki-core-persistence, and the package name org.xwiki.persistence. Persistence is an
attribute of
castles, mountains and redwood trees which I think is fitting for a conservatively
designed storage
engine.
Now a little explanation of what I'm so excited about:
The common and error prone way of saving things in the database is to open a transaction,
enter a
try clause, do something then commit. If we catch an exception, then we rollback.
something like this:
begin transaction;
try {
do something;
do something else;
commit;
} catch (Any exception which may occur) {
rollback;
}
There are 3 things which can go wrong. 1 we forget to begin the transaction, 2 we forget
to commit
and 3 we do not rollback properly. What makes things worse is often the database will
"assume we
meant to..." and things will work ok most of the time which makes things much worse
because bugs
will hide very well.
My answer to this problem is a class called TransactionRunnable. It provides a set of 5
empty
methods to override: onPreRun(), onRun(), onCommit(), onRollback(), and onComplete(). the
exact
circumstances under which each are called is documented in the javadoc comments here:
http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/contrib/sandbox/xwiki-store/xwiki-store-…
I wrote TransactionRunnable twice, I wrote it, used it for attachments, then after having
real
experience as a user, I wrote it again.
To repeat our original example with TransactionRunnable you might say this:
public class DoSomethingTransactionRunnable extends TransactionRunnable
{
public void onRun()
{
do something;
do something else;
}
}
Now we can use another TransactionRunnable which opens and closes the transaction for us.
StartableTransactionRunnable transaction = new HibernateTransactionRunnable();
new DoSomethingTransactionRunnable().runIn(transaction);
transaction.start();
the runIn() function allows us to run one TransactionRunnable inside of another. Supposing
we wanted
to reuse "do something else" in other places, we can make it a separate
TransactionRunnable and use
the runIn() function to hook it to our DoSomethingTransactionRunnable ie:
public class DoSomethingTransactionRunnable extends TransactionRunnable
{
public DoSomethingTransactionRunnable()
{
new DoSomethingElseTransactionRunnable().runIn(this);
}
..
The only limitations on running TransactionRunnables inside of one another are they cannot
run more
than once and they cannot call themselves (this would be an infinite loop).
This pattern makes each job which is done on storage easily isolated and, as I have so far
experienced, trivial to test. However, it still leaves the possibility that we might
forget that
DoSomethingTransactionRunnable must be run inside of a hibernate transaction. I have
devised a
solution for this too. Using generics, I offered a means for the author of a
TransactionRunnable to
communicate to the compiler what other TransactionRunnable their runnable must be run in
and without
explicit casting or defining of an intermediary runnable, this requirement cannot be
violated or
else it wouldn't compile!
Finally we have the issue of starting the runnable. Who's to say I won't be tired
one day and just
write new DoSomethingTransactionRunnable().start() without opening a transaction first? If
DoSomethingTransactionRunnable cannot be safely run outside of a transaction all it needs
to do is
not extend StartableTransactionRunnable and it won't have any start function.
I have taken a multitude of very easy mistakes and given the author of a
TransactionRunnable the
tools to make it very hard for the user to make them. Also, since a TransactionRunnable
has no
reason to be very long (it can just branch off into another runnable) this will make
testing and
code review easy in the place where it is most important. This part of the code is
entirely generic
and has no dependence on hibernate or anything else.
I propose we move:
contrib/sandbox/xwiki-store/xwiki-store-transaction/
to:
platform/core/xwiki-persistence/xwiki-persistence-transaction
And I will propose moving each additional piece in the coming days.
WDYT?
Caleb