anonymous wrote : I understand what you are saying, but in my opinion the "to many (java) threads" should be at the user consideration, if I want to use them, the jBPM should give that option. It's not something that could/should not be in jBPM, it's just that the combination of having a blocking process with waitstates is not something that has been requested a lot before (at all afaik) so there simple was not any time spent in realizing this. With my 'previous post' I refered to the post in this topic, sorry for the confusion. Like I said, jBPM supports executing synchronous services and is blocking IF the services you call are all synchrounous. Since you do not seem to have a problem with blocking threads, you can create blocking services. That is even cleaner than jBPM providing it 'intrisically' ;-). So this way you do not lose the 'synchronism' and I still think a thread blocking for possible long period (since you have human task) is a wrong design of a system with many downsides and possible problems like transactiontimeouts, etc.Maybe it is time to rethink some of your architecture. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4260138#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...