In
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=138168
I state
anonymous wrote :
| Database layout is considered implementation detail that might change between minor versions.
|
This is based on my understanding that a process definition is an immutable entity, which is defined in XML.
The state of running processes is persisted in the database. For many a reason It cannot be expected that jBPM can be updated for running proccess. If this feature is required we need to see this reflected in the test suite. In other words, as long as there are no automated tests that verify that an update of jBPM from version X to version Y for a non trivial set of running processes - this feature is not there.
The API will support
| ProcessEngine.prepareForShutdown()
|
This will allow processes to terminate, while others cannot start. A user is expected to setup a new instance of jBPM version Y that can receive new process requests.
>From that perspective, it is unnecessary and not even desired to provide backwards compatibility for database layout.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4161691#4161691
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4161691
good point, ed.
Also during the jBPM Community Day, the most important feedback from the core community session was migration support.
It depends on the resources we can get for this. currently the plan is to make a jPDL3 parser available in jPDL4 and make sure that both jPDL3 and jPDL4 can run next to each other.
When we enter beta stage with jPDL4, then we'll be thinking more concrete on this and we'll probably have to finetune the details at that time. Hopefully we can add some kind of database migration, but it is still too early to tell if we're going to be able to make it.
In the future we'll also work towards XML serialization and XML parsing of runtime process execution information. That might also be a way to support DB migration.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4161664#4161664
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4161664
<activity name="s" class="com.customer.OurSapIntegration">
| <field name="server"><string value="sap.intranet.customer.com"/></field>
| <transition to="next" />
| </activity>
can be given a shortcut like this
<sap name="s" server="sap.intranet.customer.com">
| <transition to="next" />
| </sap>
to improve readability.
Additions (including introduction of shortcuts like these) can even be done in micro version updates as they don't break existing backwards compatibility.
The esb node was a special case and such quick-fixes must be avoided in the future. The biggest problem with the esb node is that the action handler was located in the esb jar and not in the jbpm-jpdl jar. That way incompatibilities appeared between (jbpmruntime+designer) and (esbnode)
Also, there can be dependencies of activity implemenetations on certain configurations on the node structure properties. For example, a sequence implementation might require that the isPreviousNeeded property is set on the node. Such things further complicate the reading and writing process XML by hand.
The good part of the PVM is that the upper xml example snippet will become persistable in the generic PVM DB schema.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4161663#4161663
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4161663