如何使用JOOQ和Spring boot 2.0进行手动事务管理?

使用Spring Boot 2.0.4和JOOQ 3.11.3。

我有一个服务器端点,需要对事务管理进行细粒度的控制;它需要在外部调用前后发出多个SQL语句,并且在与外部站点交谈时不能保持DB事务处于打开状态。

在下面的代码中 testTransactionV4 是我最喜欢的尝试。

我已经看过JOOQ手册,但是事务管理部分非常简单,似乎暗示这是实现它的方法。

感觉我工作比我应该在这里更努力了,这通常是我做错了的标志。有没有更好的、正确的方法来使用Spring/JOOQ进行手动事务管理?

此外,对TransactionBean实现的任何改进都将受到极大的赞赏(并得到提升)。

但这个问题的关键是:“这是正确的方法吗?”?

测试点:

@Role.SystemApi
@SystemApiEndpoint
public class TestEndpoint {
  private static Log log = to(TestEndpoint.class);

  @Autowired private DSLContext db;
  @Autowired private TransactionBean txBean;
  @Autowired private Tx tx;

  private void doNonTransactionalThing() {
    log.info("long running thing that should not be inside a transaction");
  }

  /** Works; don't like the commitWithResult name but it'll do if there's
   no better way.  Implementation is ugly too.
   */
  @JsonPostMethod("testTransactionV4")
  public void testMultiTransactionWithTxBean() {
    log.info("start testMultiTransactionWithTxBean");

    AccountRecord account = txBean.commitWithResult( db ->
      db.fetchOne(ACCOUNT, ACCOUNT.ID.eq(1)) );

    doNonTransactionalThing();

    account.setName("test_tx+"+new Date());

    txBean.commit(db -> account.store() );
  }

  /** Works; but it's ugly, especially having to work around lambda final
   requirements on references.   */
  @JsonPostMethod("testTransactionV3")
  public void testMultiTransactionWithJooqApi() {
    log.info("start testMultiTransactionWithJooqApi");

    AtomicReference<AccountRecord> account = new AtomicReference<>();
    db.transaction( config->
      account.set(DSL.using(config).fetchOne(ACCOUNT, ACCOUNT.ID.eq(1))) );

    doNonTransactionalThing();

    account.get().setName("test_tx+"+new Date());

    db.transaction(config->{
      account.get().store();
    });
  }

  /** Does not work, there's only one commit that spans over the long operation */
  @JsonPostMethod("testTransactionV1")
  @Transactional
  public void testIncorrectSingleTransactionWithMethodAnnotation() {
    log.info("start testIncorrectSingleTransactionWithMethodAnnotation");

    AccountRecord account = db.fetchOne(ACCOUNT, ACCOUNT.ID.eq(1));

    doNonTransactionalThing();

    account.setName("test_tx+"+new Date());
    account.store();
  }

  /** Works, but I don't like defining my tx boundaries this way, readability
   is poor (relies on correct bean naming and even then is non-obvious) and is
   fragile in the face of refactoring.  When explicit TX boundaries are needed
   I want them getting in my face straight away.
   */
  @JsonPostMethod("testTransactionV2")
  public void testMultiTransactionWithNestedComponent() {
    log.info("start testTransactionWithComponentDelegation");

    AccountRecord account = tx.readAccount();

    doNonTransactionalThing();

    account.setName("test_tx+"+new Date());
    tx.writeAccount(account);
  }

  @Component
  static class Tx {
    @Autowired private DSLContext db;

    @Transactional
    public AccountRecord readAccount() {
      return db.fetchOne(ACCOUNT, ACCOUNT.ID.eq(1));
    }

    @Transactional
    public void writeAccount(AccountRecord account) {
      account.store();
    }
  }

}

事务处理bean:

@Component
public class TransactionBean {
  @Autowired private DSLContext db;

  /**
   Don't like the name, but can't figure out how to make it be just "commit".
   */
  public <T> T commitWithResult(Function<DSLContext, T> worker) {
    // Yuck, at the very least need an array or something as the holder.
    AtomicReference<T> result = new AtomicReference<>();
    db.transaction( config -> result.set(
      worker.apply(DSL.using(config))
    ));
    return result.get();
  }

  public void commit(Consumer<DSLContext> worker) {
    db.transaction( config ->
      worker.accept(DSL.using(config))
    );
  }

  public void commit(Runnable worker) {
    db.transaction( config ->
      worker.run()
    );
  }
}