Bug 154871 - Java code handles transactions incorrectly
Summary: Java code handles transactions incorrectly
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Network
Classification: Retired
Component: RHN/Other
Version: RHN Devel
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Bret McMillan
QA Contact: Robin Norwood
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 151514
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2005-04-14 17:00 UTC by David Lutterkort
Modified: 2013-04-30 23:39 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version: RHN 4.0.0
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2005-08-31 20:56:05 UTC
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description David Lutterkort 2005-04-14 17:00:29 UTC
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040204 Galeon/1.3.12

Description of problem:
The Java code does not always ensure that we have exactly one transaction per HTTP request. In some cases we commit more than once during a request, making it possible to leave objects in an inconsistent state that the user has no way of fixing.

UserManager.createUser is an example of this.

See the thread at http://post-office.corp.redhat.com/archives/rhn-java-list/2005-April/msg00169.html for more discussion





Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
Review code
  

Additional info:

Comment 1 David Lutterkort 2005-04-27 18:23:19 UTC
Committed a TransactionFactory at r53746

Comment 2 David Lutterkort 2005-04-27 18:24:42 UTC
Fixed estimate and updated with progress

Comment 3 David Lutterkort 2005-05-09 19:38:27 UTC
Txn handling is now done in SessionFilter. Nesting txns will produce errors. r54527

Comment 4 David Lutterkort 2005-05-09 19:45:44 UTC
Update effort info

Comment 5 Todd Warner 2005-05-16 17:59:47 UTC
mass move to ON_QA

Comment 6 Vlady Zlatkin 2005-06-28 00:57:29 UTC
testplan?

Comment 7 David Lutterkort 2005-07-06 20:46:19 UTC
This bug is not testable by QA. The only indication that something go wrong is
that if a user performs a UI action that changes something, and that action
fails with a server error, changes may have been written to teh database.

We have unit tests to verify that this does not happen;

Bret: what's the best proper way to close out this bug ?

Comment 8 Bret McMillan 2005-07-14 20:09:19 UTC
mass move for 7/14 qa push.  picking up jesusr's and shughes' since they're both
out, as well.

Comment 9 Bret McMillan 2005-07-26 01:15:20 UTC
Setting rnorwood as qa contact for java migration bugs

Comment 10 Robin Norwood 2005-07-26 16:07:04 UTC
Moving this to PROD_READY, since as david says, there's not a good way to QA
this directly.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.