OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsbpel message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Conflicting partnerlinks


Eckenfels. Bernd wrote:

>Hello Assaf,
>
>This understanding would be my preferred solution. 
>
>However I rember a lot of discussions about different process instances
>who can step on the toes of each other (and provoke a conflicting
>receive).  I think they originated from the correlation task of finding
>the correct process instance (which is allowed to spawn different
>process templates).
>  
>
This could only happen, for example, if both receive messages on the 
same endpoint. We don't talk about how endpoints are associated to 
partner links, but if we did, I could note two cases. One where two 
partner links with distinct names happen to be associated with the same 
endpoint, leading to this issue. The other where two partner links with 
identical names are associated with distinct endpoints, not having this 
problem.

>If we (now) all agree, that we do not define
>cross-process-template-instance constraints, I would feel fine (not sure
>if thet would require a change in spec)
>  
>
So far we've avoided doing that and only talk about each process in 
isolation.

Assaf

>Greetings
>Bernd
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Assaf Arkin [mailto:arkin@intalio.com] 
>Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 6:51 PM
>To: Eckenfels. Bernd
>Cc: wsbpeltc
>Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Conflicting partnerlinks
>
>Eckenfels. Bernd wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Thinks we need to consider:
>>
>>Bla:Proc1 and Fasel:Proc2 both define a PartnerLink name="initial"  - 
>>are outstanding receives allowed?
>>
>>Bla.Proc1 defines two PartnerLink name="initial" in <scope><partnerLink
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>name="initial" /><scope><partnerLink name="initial"
>>/>...</sceope></scope> - are two conflicting receives allowed?
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>The other possibility is that these two receives (in both examples) are
>not conflicting since the partner links are distinct, and therefore can
>be enabled simultaneously.
>
>My reading of the spec is that if you declare two partner links, they
>are distinct. As are two instances resulting from two process instances
>or scope instances. The name does not disambiguate globally, nor is it
>the source of distinction.
>
>Assaf
>
>
>  
>
>>Greetings
>>Bernd
>>
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsbpel-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
>>For additional commands, e-mail: wsbpel-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: wsbpel-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: wsbpel-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>
>
>  
>

begin:vcard
fn:Assaf Arkin
n:Arkin;Assaf
org:Intalio
adr;dom:;;1000 Bridge Parkway Ste 210;Redwood City;CA;94065
email;internet:arkin@intalio.com
title:Chief Architect
tel;work:(650) 596-1800
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:http://www.intalio.com
version:2.1
end:vcard

S/MIME Cryptographic Signature



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]