[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Topics for the "Review input from TC members" session of the F2FSome
Mike, These are interesting assertions. First of all this sound like something out of "General Hospital" - "It is not a problem for stateless idempotent WSDL operations" - translation into simple business english, please!?! Then second of all - there's a lot of assumptions here about the "whole point" of BPEL - obviously this is fodder for the F2F, what exactly are we deciding here, if anything!?! We need some ground rules. The TC scope of course completely glosses over these minor details - but we definately need something drafted for the F2F as a start point - is someone going to collate these items into something coherent and formal? Thanks, DW. ====================================================== Message text written by "Marin, Mike" > Well, yes and no. It is not a problem for stateless idempotent WSDL operations. However, the whole point of BPEL is to support state full and potentially long running services to run real business stuff. Therefore, BPEL should suggest a solution or at least identify the problem for somebody to solve. There are several solutions to this issue, including the one mentioned by Fred (except that it does not work under the common case of SOAP under WSDL). Others include simple variations of two-phase commit to guarantee message delivery. <
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]