[jbpm-issues] [JBoss JIRA] Resolved: (JBPM-2040) Inconsistent behaviour depending on the ordering of events (fork+end state+join)

Inconsistent behaviour depending on the ordering of events (fork+end state+join) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Key: JBPM-2040 URL: https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBPM-2040 Project: JBoss jBPM Issue Type: Bug Security Level: Public(Everyone can see) Components: Runtime Engine Reporter: Mauro Molinari Assignee: Joram Barrez Fix For: jBPM 4.1 Please investigate to see if jBPM4 works as expected. Because of backward compatibility JBPM-1906 has been rejected for jBPM3. Given the following process definition: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <process-definition xmlns="urn:jbpm.org:jpdl-3.2" name="Complex"> <description> Complex description </description> <start-state name="start-state1"> <transition to="task-node1"></transition> </start-state> <task-node name="task-node3"> <task name="Task3_1"> <assignment actor-id="1"></assignment> </task> <transition to="end-state1"></transition> </task-node> <node name="node1"> <transition to="task-node3"></transition> </node> <join name="join1"> <transition to="node1"></transition> </join> <fork name="fork1"> <transition to="task-node2"></transition> <transition to="node2" name="to node2"></transition> <transition to="state1" name="to state1"></transition> </fork> <task-node name="task-node2"> <task name="Task2_1"> <assignment actor-id="1"></assignment> </task> <task name="Task2_2"> <assignment actor-id="1"></assignment> </task> <transition to="join1"></transition> </task-node> <task-node name="task-node1"> <task name="Task1_1"> <assignment actor-id="1"></assignment> </task> <transition to="fork1"></transition> </task-node> <node name="node2"> <transition to="end-state2"></transition> </node> <state name="state1"> <transition to="end-state2"></transition> </state> <end-state name="end-state1"></end-state> <end-state name="end-state2"></end-state> </process-definition> Try to do this: - create a process instance and start it - a Task1_1 instance is created: end it - the root token halts at the fork and three children tokens are created 1) the first causes the creation of a Task2_1 instance and of a Task2_2 instance 2) the second halts at the state1 state 3) the third dies at the end-state2 state Now, there are two cases: CASE A) - signal the second token: it then goes on and dies at end-state2 state - end Task2_1 and Task2_2 instances so that the first token goes on and reaches the join - now, the root token is restored and goes through node1 and task-node3 nodes, causing the creation of a Task3_1 instance This is what I would expect! CASE B) - end Task2_1 and Task2_2 instances so that the first token goes on and reaches the join - signal the second token: it then goes on and dies at end-state2 state - now, the root token is ended, halting the process instance! This is not the expected behaviour, as I would expect that the root token is restored because now all the sibling tokens of those that have reached the join node are ended, so the parent token (= the root token) should be restored and should continue to node1 and subsequent nodes. Moreover, I would not expect that the behaviour is different depending on the ordering of the actions "signal the state1 token" and "signal the task-node2 token". My suspect is this: in case B) the join node is not "triggered" anymore after Task2_1 and Task2_2 are ended, so it can't restore the parent node. Moreover, when the second children token is signalled, it reaches end-state2: jBPM then realizes that all of the sibling tokens are also ended, so it wrongly decides that the parent token should also be ended.