Question about workitems and abort
by Giovanni Marigi
Hi all,
my question is about the completion of a custom workitem; my scenario:
- process reaches and executes a custom work item
- work item throws an exception (under the hood it calls an ejb that throws an exception)
- the exception is catched inside the work item
- inside the catch block the method manager.abortWorkItem is called
In case of abortion of a work item I'm wondering why the nest step inside a process is anyway called?
In case of abortion of a work item IMHO the process should not go on but "roll back" to the previous safe state
This is the scenario my customer need.
Actually I'm facing this situation not calling the method manager.abortWorkItem but throwing inside the work item a
throw new IllegalStateException("****EJBControlWorkItemHandler:ILLEGAL STATE EXCEPTION!!!****")
Maybe a solution could be an evaluation of the work item status after the completion of the work item. Anyway how can I handle an automatically rollback to a previous safe state?
Thanks,
Giovanni
--
Giovanni Marigi
Red Hat - JBoss Consultant -
email: gmarigi(a)redhat.com
Mobile: +39 3423175986
Office: +39 0687502315
Red Hat Italy
Via Andrea Doria 41m
00192 Roma - Italy
www.redhat.com
Prima di stampare, pensa all'ambiente ** Think about the environment before printing
--
Giovanni Marigi
Red Hat - JBoss Consultant -
email: gmarigi(a)redhat.com
Mobile: +39 3423175986
Office: +39 0687502315
Red Hat Italy
Via Andrea Doria 41m
00192 Roma - Italy
www.redhat.com
Prima di stampare, pensa all'ambiente ** Think about the environment before printing
13 years
human task schema and marshalling?
by Marco Rietveld
Hi dev's,
I've been working on documenting the jbpm DB schema's today and noticed
how extensive the human task schema is.
One of the enormous advantages of the marshalling code in drools and
jbpm is that schema modifications are transparent to the end user:
adding a new entity/table or modifying one then doesn't mean anything to
the user, whereas without marshalling, the users are forced to update
their schema's -- or sometimes even abandon old data because schema/db
migrations are impractical/impossible.
(As I'm writing this, btw, the saying "Premature optimization is the
root of all bugs" does come to mind -- concerning what I'm about to
propose.)
In any case, are there any opinions on providing an option to save the
HT info via marshalling, in one object á la SessionInfo,
ProcessInstanceInfo or WorkItemInfo[1]?
The main reason to offer this would be that it transfers the complexity
from the database to the code (which can be as much a pro as a con),
and that it makes backwards compatibility a lot easier.
Thanks,
Marco
[1] as if there's not enough other stuff to do, by the way. ;D
--
jBPM/Drools developer
Utrecht, the Netherlands
13 years
Re: [jbpm-dev] Nodes and Process instance are not mapping after persistence
by Leo.Li
Hello Salaboy,
Thanks for you reply, I had update the questions on forums, please check.
http://community.jboss.org/thread/175443
Thanks a lot
Leo.Li
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com>
> Date: 2012/1/8
> Subject: Re: [jbpm-dev] Nodes and Process instance are not mapping after
> persistence
> To: "Leo.Li" <leo87601(a)gmail.com>
> Cc: jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
>
> Hi Leo.Li,
> You should write these questions into the forums not to the dev list.
> I will need to read that thread carefully, because ksession as a
> singleton doesn't sound good at all
> about your questions
> 2 and 3. the binary data stored is for internal usage, you should
> externalize the data that you want about the process execution using
> the history logs.
> 4. not sure what you mean with that.. can you elaborate?
>
> Cheers
>
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 11:50 PM, Leo.Li <leo87601(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hello All,
> >
> > As we investigate and PoC in last two months, we found some unstable
> problem
> > in this platform. (http://community.jboss.org/thread/175443)
> >
> > We had a template solution to fix this problem, made the Ksession
> > as singleton object. But we cannot load the snapshot or
> new assets easily.
> >
> > We have following questions:
> >
> > 1. how to fix this kind of old data?
> > 2. Can the JBPM5 store the data as the JBPM4 (RDBMS)?
> > 3. Can we have some way to watch the data in PROCESSINSTANCEBYTEARRAY ?
> > 4. If we have more than one history snapshot in the same processid(like
> > "leadprocess"), can the JBPM5 load the correct history version for my
> > instance?
> > In other word, we had created the instance1 on snapshot1, instance2 on
> > snapsot2. After the third version as the latest package. And than when
> I'm
> > handling the instance1, will they still using the snapshot1 workflow? Or
> we
> > need to coding in our side to achieve this?
> >
> > It would be nice if you could provide a bit more information on the these
> > problem.
> >
> > Thanks a lots
> > Leo
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > jbpm-dev mailing list
> > jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
> >
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
>
13 years
Nodes and Process instance are not mapping after persistence
by Leo.Li
Hello All,
As we investigate and PoC in last two months, we found some unstable
problem in this platform. (http://community.jboss.org/thread/175443)
We had a template solution to fix this problem, made the Ksession
as singleton object. But we cannot load the snapshot or new assets easily.
We have following questions:
1. how to fix this kind of old data?
2. Can the JBPM5 store the data as the JBPM4 (RDBMS)?
3. Can we have some way to watch the data in
*PROCESSINSTANCEBYTEARRAY*
<http://localhost:8082/query.do?jsessionid=eba938cf1dbf38d4a410125bbe377788#>
?
4. If we have more than one history snapshot in the same processid(like
"leadprocess"), can the JBPM5 load the correct history version for my
instance?
In other word, we had created the instance1 on snapshot1, instance2 on
snapsot2. After the third version as the latest package. And than when I'm
handling the instance1, will they still using the snapshot1 workflow? Or we
need to coding in our side to achieve this?
It would be nice if you could provide a bit more information on the these
problem.
Thanks a lots
Leo
13 years