glassfish
  1. glassfish
  2. GLASSFISH-20440

[BATCH RI] Batch Runtime fails to call listeners for partitioned steps

    Details

    • Type: Bug Bug
    • Status: Resolved
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: 4.0_b86_RC2
    • Fix Version/s: 4.0_b88_RC4
    • Component/s: batch
    • Labels:
      None
    • Environment:

      Any

      Description

      The batch runtime fails to call any of the spec'd programming model's listeners for a partitioned step on the partitioned threads.

      Though we do call the StepListener's beforeStep()/afterStep() on the main thread, we fail to call ChunkListener, SkipListener, RetryListener, ItemReadListener, etc. on each partitioned threads.

      This is a significant restriction on the programming model for partitioned steps.

        Activity

        Hide
        Mahesh Kannan added a comment -
        • What is the impact on the customer of the bug?
          Though we do call the StepListener's beforeStep()/afterStep() on the main thread, we fail to call ChunkListener, SkipListener, RetryListener, ItemReadListener, etc. on each partitioned threads.
        • What is the impact on the customer of the bug?
          This is a significant restriction on the programming model for partitioned steps.
        • What is the cost/risk of fixing the bug?
          Very low, since the RI team has already run the TCK / CTS tests
        • Is there an impact on documentation or message strings?
          No.
        • Which tests should QA (re)run to verify the fix did not destabilize GlassFish?
          Batch QE tests

        Which is the targeted build of 4.0 for this fix?
        88.

        If this an integration of a new version of a component from another project,
        what are the changes that are being brought in?
        Requires b30 jars from IBM Batch

        Show
        Mahesh Kannan added a comment - What is the impact on the customer of the bug? Though we do call the StepListener's beforeStep()/afterStep() on the main thread, we fail to call ChunkListener, SkipListener, RetryListener, ItemReadListener, etc. on each partitioned threads. What is the impact on the customer of the bug? This is a significant restriction on the programming model for partitioned steps. What is the cost/risk of fixing the bug? Very low, since the RI team has already run the TCK / CTS tests Is there an impact on documentation or message strings? No. Which tests should QA (re)run to verify the fix did not destabilize GlassFish? Batch QE tests Which is the targeted build of 4.0 for this fix? 88. If this an integration of a new version of a component from another project, what are the changes that are being brought in? Requires b30 jars from IBM Batch
        Hide
        Mahesh Kannan added a comment -
        • What is the impact on the customer of the bug?
          Though we do call the StepListener's beforeStep()/afterStep() on the main thread, we fail to call ChunkListener, SkipListener, RetryListener, ItemReadListener, etc. on each partitioned threads.
        • What is the impact on the customer of the bug?
          This is a significant restriction on the programming model for partitioned steps.
        • What is the cost/risk of fixing the bug?
          Very low, since the RI team has already run the TCK / CTS tests
        • Is there an impact on documentation or message strings?
          No.
        • Which tests should QA (re)run to verify the fix did not destabilize GlassFish?
          Batch QE tests
        • Which is the targeted build of 4.0 for this fix?
          88.
        • If this an integration of a new version of a component from another project,
          What are the changes that are being brought in?
          Requires b30 jars from IBM Batch

        The pom.xml changes diffs are pasted below:

        svn diff main/appserver/pom.xml
        Index: main/appserver/pom.xml
        ===================================================================
        — main/appserver/pom.xml (revision 61823)
        +++ main/appserver/pom.xml (working copy)
        @@ -125,9 +125,9 @@
        <jsonp.version>1.0</jsonp.version>
        <concurrent-api.version>1.0</concurrent-api.version>
        <concurrent.version>1.0</concurrent.version>

        • <javax.batch-api.version>1.0-b26</javax.batch-api.version>
        • <com.ibm.jbatch-runtime-all.version>1.0-b26</com.ibm.jbatch-runtime-all.version>
        • <com.ibm.jbatch-ri-spi.version>1.0-b26</com.ibm.jbatch-ri-spi.version>
          + <javax.batch-api.version>1.0-b30</javax.batch-api.version>
          + <com.ibm.jbatch-runtime-all.version>1.0-b30</com.ibm.jbatch-runtime-all.version>
          + <com.ibm.jbatch-ri-spi.version>1.0-b30</com.ibm.jbatch-ri-spi.version>
          <javax.xml.soap-api.version>1.3.5</javax.xml.soap-api.version>
          <javax.management.j2ee-api.version>1.1.1</javax.management.j2ee-api.version>
          </properties>
        Show
        Mahesh Kannan added a comment - What is the impact on the customer of the bug? Though we do call the StepListener's beforeStep()/afterStep() on the main thread, we fail to call ChunkListener, SkipListener, RetryListener, ItemReadListener, etc. on each partitioned threads. What is the impact on the customer of the bug? This is a significant restriction on the programming model for partitioned steps. What is the cost/risk of fixing the bug? Very low, since the RI team has already run the TCK / CTS tests Is there an impact on documentation or message strings? No. Which tests should QA (re)run to verify the fix did not destabilize GlassFish? Batch QE tests Which is the targeted build of 4.0 for this fix? 88. If this an integration of a new version of a component from another project, What are the changes that are being brought in? Requires b30 jars from IBM Batch The pom.xml changes diffs are pasted below: svn diff main/appserver/pom.xml Index: main/appserver/pom.xml =================================================================== — main/appserver/pom.xml (revision 61823) +++ main/appserver/pom.xml (working copy) @@ -125,9 +125,9 @@ <jsonp.version>1.0</jsonp.version> <concurrent-api.version>1.0</concurrent-api.version> <concurrent.version>1.0</concurrent.version> <javax.batch-api.version>1.0-b26</javax.batch-api.version> <com.ibm.jbatch-runtime-all.version>1.0-b26</com.ibm.jbatch-runtime-all.version> <com.ibm.jbatch-ri-spi.version>1.0-b26</com.ibm.jbatch-ri-spi.version> + <javax.batch-api.version>1.0-b30</javax.batch-api.version> + <com.ibm.jbatch-runtime-all.version>1.0-b30</com.ibm.jbatch-runtime-all.version> + <com.ibm.jbatch-ri-spi.version>1.0-b30</com.ibm.jbatch-ri-spi.version> <javax.xml.soap-api.version>1.3.5</javax.xml.soap-api.version> <javax.management.j2ee-api.version>1.1.1</javax.management.j2ee-api.version> </properties>
        Hide
        Mahesh Kannan added a comment -

        Actullay, need to integrate b29 jars

        svn diff appserver/pom.xml
        Index: appserver/pom.xml
        ===================================================================
        — appserver/pom.xml (revision 61827)
        +++ appserver/pom.xml (working copy)
        @@ -126,9 +126,9 @@
        <jsonp.version>1.0</jsonp.version>
        <concurrent-api.version>1.0</concurrent-api.version>
        <concurrent.version>1.0</concurrent.version>

        • <javax.batch-api.version>1.0-b26</javax.batch-api.version>
        • <com.ibm.jbatch-runtime-all.version>1.0-b26</com.ibm.jbatch-runtime-all.version>
        • <com.ibm.jbatch-ri-spi.version>1.0-b26</com.ibm.jbatch-ri-spi.version>
          + <javax.batch-api.version>1.0-b29</javax.batch-api.version>
          + <com.ibm.jbatch-runtime-all.version>1.0-b29</com.ibm.jbatch-runtime-all.version>
          + <com.ibm.jbatch-ri-spi.version>1.0-b29</com.ibm.jbatch-ri-spi.version>
          <javax.xml.soap-api.version>1.3.5</javax.xml.soap-api.version>
          <javax.management.j2ee-api.version>1.1.1</javax.management.j2ee-api.version>
          </properties>
        Show
        Mahesh Kannan added a comment - Actullay, need to integrate b29 jars svn diff appserver/pom.xml Index: appserver/pom.xml =================================================================== — appserver/pom.xml (revision 61827) +++ appserver/pom.xml (working copy) @@ -126,9 +126,9 @@ <jsonp.version>1.0</jsonp.version> <concurrent-api.version>1.0</concurrent-api.version> <concurrent.version>1.0</concurrent.version> <javax.batch-api.version>1.0-b26</javax.batch-api.version> <com.ibm.jbatch-runtime-all.version>1.0-b26</com.ibm.jbatch-runtime-all.version> <com.ibm.jbatch-ri-spi.version>1.0-b26</com.ibm.jbatch-ri-spi.version> + <javax.batch-api.version>1.0-b29</javax.batch-api.version> + <com.ibm.jbatch-runtime-all.version>1.0-b29</com.ibm.jbatch-runtime-all.version> + <com.ibm.jbatch-ri-spi.version>1.0-b29</com.ibm.jbatch-ri-spi.version> <javax.xml.soap-api.version>1.3.5</javax.xml.soap-api.version> <javax.management.j2ee-api.version>1.1.1</javax.management.j2ee-api.version> </properties>
        Hide
        Mahesh Kannan added a comment -

        Integrate b29 jars:

        ============================

        Branch commit info:

        svn commit -m "Fix for 20440. QL Passed. Batch devtests passed. Approved by Michael" pom.xml
        Sending pom.xml
        Transmitting file data .
        Committed revision 61832.

        =============================

        Trunk commit info:

        svn commit -m "Fix for 20440. QL Passed. Batch devtests passed. Approved by Michael" pom.xml
        Sending pom.xml
        Transmitting file data .
        Committed revision 61833.

        ==============================

        Show
        Mahesh Kannan added a comment - Integrate b29 jars: ============================ Branch commit info: svn commit -m "Fix for 20440. QL Passed. Batch devtests passed. Approved by Michael" pom.xml Sending pom.xml Transmitting file data . Committed revision 61832. ============================= Trunk commit info: svn commit -m "Fix for 20440. QL Passed. Batch devtests passed. Approved by Michael" pom.xml Sending pom.xml Transmitting file data . Committed revision 61833. ==============================

          People

          • Assignee:
            ScottKurz
            Reporter:
            ScottKurz
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            0 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: