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] Fault in Compensation



Dieter,

We probably need to add issue 229 to this group as well (207/216/226).

Rgds,

-----Original Message-----
From: Dieter Koenig1 [mailto:dieterkoenig@de.ibm.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 8:57 AM
To: Satish Thatte
Cc: Alex Yiu; Yuzo Fujishima; ws bpel tc
Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Fault in Compensation

This is also how I interpreted the results of the f2f discussion. The
fault
within the compensation handler is caught by the fault handler F2 of
scope
S2. All other instances of compensation handler CH1 called by the
compensate activity CA1 get the termination signal, and all instances of
compensation handler CH1 get uninstalled.

We talked explicitly about CH in event handlers and parallel forEach
activities, however, this way of treating instances of CH as a unit has
the
same result for CH in sequential loops. As I am still working on text
for
the 207/216/226 family of CH-related issue resolutions, I would
generalize
this behavior, including while, repeatUntil, and sequential forEach as
well. Ok?

Kind Regards
DK



 

             "Satish Thatte"

             <satisht@microsof

             t.com>
To 
                                       "Alex Yiu" <alex.yiu@oracle.com>,

             01.11.2005 07:05          "Yuzo Fujishima"

                                       <fujishima@bc.jp.nec.com>

 
cc 
                                       "ws bpel tc"

                                       <wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org>,

                                       Dieter Koenig1/Germany/IBM@IBMDE

 
Subject 
                                       RE: [wsbpel] Fault in
Compensation  
 

 

 

 

 

 





See below



From: Alex Yiu [mailto:alex.yiu@oracle.com]
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 8:57 PM
To: Yuzo Fujishima
Cc: ws bpel tc; 'Dieter Koenig1'; Satish Thatte
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Fault in Compensation


Hi Yuzo,

This question falls into Issue 226 domain.
The resolution of Issue 226 needs to be able to answer your question
clearly.
(I will forward this email to issue 226 thread later.)

My current interpretation:
Q1: No there will not be the second invocation of CH1. Once the
compensation handler of a completed scope got faulted, the whole scope
also
considered faulted (maybe we can come up with a more specialized term
for
that). (We need a life cycle diagram of "scope" here in the spec) The CH
of
such a scope should be uninstalled. (Because, if not uninstalled, the CH
may be in a strange inconsistent state, where the CH logic may executed
incorrectly, if it got executed twice.)
[Satish] This is correct and I believe it is explicitly stated in the
resolution of 226.

Q2: Yes, the T1 should be propagated to S2 and handled by F2.


Dieter and Satish, if my interpretation is different from yours and your
collection of the preliminary direction discussed in Redmond F2F, please
let me know.


Thanks!


Regards,
Alex Yiu



Yuzo Fujishima wrote:
Hi,

I have yet other questions regarding compensation.
Could someone help me answer to them?

Suppose we have a process as below:

process P1
 faultHandler F0 to catch T1
 flow
   scope S1
     faultHandler F1 to catch T2
       scope S2
         faultHandler F2 to catch T1
         compensate CA1
     sequence
       while
         scope S3
           compensationHandler CH1
             throw T1
       throw T2
   scope S4

Further suppose that
 S3 is successfully completed two times,
 T2 throws a fault,
 F1 catches the fault, and then
 CA1 is executed.

What is expected to happen next is that CH1 is called twice,
once for each successful completion.

But what will happen if T1 throws a fault in the first
invocation of CH1?

Q1: Will there be the second invocation of CH1?

Q2: Will the fault be propagated to CA1 then to S2?
   Or S3, S1 (FH uninstalled), then to P1?
   In other words, which will catch T1, F2 or F0?

Yuzo Fujishima
NEC Corporation

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
OASIS
at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
OASIS
at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php 




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