Issue using a GenericRequester with persistent async services

[Vogelsme]

Hey!
I was just trying to run a persistent async service with a given requester and noticed that the requester itself is completely being ignored.
I cross-checked trunk and 13/07 for that issue and both handle async services the same way; there was no hint in javadoc about that.
There might be some ways to persist and use a stored Object/Requester (ClassLoader, ObjectStore, ...) for the services. I was wondering if there is a reason or conceptual issue with that.

I know the concept of Requesters is rarely used in OFBiz, but we use it to actively control multithreaded services.

Greetings,
Mirko

[Scott Gray-3]

Hi Mirko,

I had a quick look at the code and it looks to me like the GenericRequester
is used if passed in but only if the job is run in memory instead of being
persisted to the database.  Are you seeing something different or are you
expecting that it would be serialized and stored with the job?

Regards
Scott

On 31 August 2016 at 21:16, Vogelsme <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hey!
> I was just trying to run a persistent async service with a given requester
> and noticed that the requester itself is completely being ignored.
> I cross-checked trunk and 13/07 for that issue and both handle async
> services the same way; there was no hint in javadoc about that.
> There might be some ways to persist and use a stored Object/Requester
> (ClassLoader, ObjectStore, ...) for the services. I was wondering if there
> is a reason or conceptual issue with that.
>
> I know the concept of Requesters is rarely used in OFBiz, but we use it to
> actively control multithreaded services.
>
> Greetings,
> Mirko
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.
> com/Issue-using-a-GenericRequester-with-persistent-async-services-
> tp4692059.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>

[Vogelsme]

Hi Scrott,

thanks for reply. Your research matches exactly with my findings.
I would have expected the object to be serialized or at least log a warning / throw an illigalArgumentException / ... .
I don't think that it is a good idea to provide the option (as a method signature) but then ignore given parameters.

Greetings,
Mirko