[jboss-dev-forums] [Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: StartProcessInstanceCommand: Return token id/process ins

[Kevin.Conner@jboss.com]

"camunda" wrote : But how to implement this if you think of the use case that an external client asks for the status of the process instance?
Sorry, I thought I had previously agreed that was a valid use case.

"camunda" wrote : You skipped the second question in that sentence ;-) Let's say you handed over the token id as correlation identifier to a third party application. It calls back, e.g. via JMS, containing only the token id. Now you have to signal the process instance with that token id, right
Sorry, I thought I had answered this.  You cannot do this with just the token id as it is not sufficient for signalling.  You need to have a different correlation mechanism with the external service and something has to manage that correlation.

"camunda" wrote : And currently this functionality is missing, so this is why I see the demand for the "old" SignalCommand.
It is the correlation functionality that is missing and not the signal command.

"camunda" wrote : By the way, an often requested use case is to update the version of the ProcessDefinition of a special ProcessInstance (e.g. to apply a fix). This is possible with a Command in jbpm, even if it is marked as experimental, since it can cause some problems. One problem with the currrent implementation is, that node-id has changed, so the EPR isn't working. I added a note in the ChangeProcessInstanceVersionCommand but think we can ignore that for know. If people use that command, they should know what they are doing...

This is not something we support with the current integration as there are many ways in which it can go wrong.  As you say, it is experimental.

"camunda" wrote : I always work with the token id, because it is unambigous if multiple tokens exist for the ProcessInstance.
Except tokens come and go, loop etc.

"camunda" wrote : Basically I agree with it. I am not complaining about the solution as such, the problem is more the too complicated code and missing examples and the lack of an excellent tutorial for it. And some "details" are missing, like the correlation stuff. All of it "just" a matter of resources and time ;-)
I think we agree on all of these :)

Thanks very much for the feedback, keep it coming :)

Kev


View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4200119#4200119

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4200119