Hi, i have problem with timer on a task-node "A"
<task-node name="A">
</task-node>
When taskInstance A is active and duedate expires i would like transition to task B, but i have this strange behaviour:
-a new taskInstance B is created and is ok
- task instance A is still active and this is bad
-because task instance A remains active then timer expires again and so i have exceptions
I'm using jbpm 3.1.3 , is this a possible bug?
The same occurs if i implement a custom jbpm action with code to make transition,
thank you for help in advance
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4037029#4037029
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4037029
I think working with two xml based pd's the problem should not be there any more. I have not tested that yet. But that is not what we want. I also agree with you about the hibernate part.
To summarize the problem, we want to have process versioning working while changing process definition programmatically and without parsing the xml again. IMHO this method, jbpmContext.deployProcessDefinition(pd), should in any case support process versioning.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4037025#4037025
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4037025
Hello.
I was under an obligation do session bean which method generate
unique identifier ( timestamp (yyyymmddhhmmss) + counter).
I store last value identifier in database and use strict locking condition (db) -
this way I'm sure that it is unique.
I'm looking for more efficient way for solve this problem.
I was thinking about store last value in bean static variable with kev word volatile. I know that EJB specyfication is not favourable for using threads features. Is possible using volatile word for synchronize access to static variable ?
thank in advance
regard
gienasek
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4037024#4037024
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4037024