[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Simple process not ending.
by srsuarez
I execute my business process using the following code:
Code:
GraphSession graphSession = jbpmContext.getGraphSession();
log.debug("Finding process definition: MyProcess");
ProcessDefinition processDefinition = graphSession.findLatestProcessDefinition("MyProcess");
log.debug("Creating new process instance: MyProcess");
ProcessInstance processInstance = new ProcessInstance(processDefinition);
log.debug("Saving process instance: MyProcess");
jbpmContext.save(processInstance);
og.debug("Executing business process: MyProcess");
processInstance.signal();
log.debug("Is process ended? " + processInstance.hasEnded());
log.debug("Saving process instance: MyProcess");
jbpmContext.save(processInstance);
String status = (String) processInstance.getContextInstance().getVariable(PVAR_engineStatus);
log.info("return=" + status);
My code here and the code in the node action in my business process execute successfully, without any errors. However, the problem is that the process shows that it has not ended -- the processInstance.hasEnded() method returns false, and the process instance saved to the database also shows that the process has not yet ended. Again, there are no wait states in this business process, and there are transitions from start to my node to the end. Why isn't my business process showing that it has ended?
thank you
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3996867#3996867
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3996867
17 years, 12 months
[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Simple process not ending.
by srsuarez
I execute my business process using the following code:
Code:
GraphSession graphSession = jbpmContext.getGraphSession();
log.debug("Finding process definition: MyProcess");
ProcessDefinition processDefinition = graphSession.findLatestProcessDefinition("MyProcess");
log.debug("Creating new process instance: MyProcess");
ProcessInstance processInstance = new ProcessInstance(processDefinition);
log.debug("Saving process instance: MyProcess");
jbpmContext.save(processInstance);
og.debug("Executing business process: MyProcess");
processInstance.signal();
log.debug("Is process ended? " + processInstance.hasEnded());
log.debug("Saving process instance: MyProcess");
jbpmContext.save(processInstance);
String status = (String) processInstance.getContextInstance().getVariable(PVAR_engineStatus);
log.info("return=" + status);
My code here and the code in the node action in my business process execute successfully, without any errors. However, the problem is that the process shows that it has not ended -- the processInstance.hasEnded() method returns false, and the process instance saved to the database also shows that the process has not yet ended. Again, there are no wait states in this business process, and there are transitions from start to my node to the end. Why isn't my business process showing that it has ended?
thank you
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3996866#3996866
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3996866
17 years, 12 months
[Design of JBossCache] - Re: Serialization Compatibility Tests
by manik.surtani@jboss.com
Ok, we have a problem with these classes:
| org.jboss.cache.OptimisticTreeNode
| org.jboss.cache.optimistic.DefaultDataVersion
| org.jboss.cache.optimistic.FqnComparator
|
They currently (1.4.1.CR1) have svuid fields set to be compatible with 1.4.0, which is not compatible with 1.3.0. If I change these to be compatible with 1.3.0, it will break compat with 1.4.0, which I think is more important.
At the end of the day though, minor version updates are allowed to break wire-level compat, as long as the API is not broken. So 1.3.0 -> 1.4.0 causing a serialization error should be ok, I suppose? Not ideal, and this should be minimised as far as possible, but I can't see a way around this now that this is out in 1.4.0.
At least having a test suite like this will mean this shouldn't happen in future.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3996856#3996856
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3996856
17 years, 12 months