[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Issue - 244 - Inconsistent definitions of conflictingRequest
This issue has been added to the wsbpel issue list with a status of "received". The status will be changed to "open" if a motion to open the issue is proposed and that motion is approved by the TC. A motion could also be proposed to close it without further consideration. Otherwise it will remain as "received".
The issues list is posted as a Technical Committee document to the OASIS WSBPEL TC pages on a regular basis. The current edition, as a TC document, is the most recent version of the document entitled in the "Issues" folder of the WSBPEL TC document list - the next posting as a TC document will include this issue. The list editor's working copy, which will normally include an issue when it is announced, is available at this constant URL.
Sec. 10.4:
"The correlation between a request and the corresponding reply is based on the constraint that more than one outstanding synchronous request from a specific partner link for a particular portType, operation and correlation set(s) MUST NOT be outstanding simultaneously. If this constraint is violated during execution, then the standard fault bpws:conflictingRequest MUST be thrown by a compliant implementation".
[...]
"If there should ever be multiple simultaneous incomplete inbound message activities which have the same partnerLink, operation and messageExchange tuple then the bpws:conflictingRequest fault MUST be thrown within the BPEL process on the conflicting inbound message activities subsequent to the execution of the successful incomplete receive".
Appendix A:
"conflictingRequest - Thrown when more than one synchronous inbound request on the same partner link for a particular port type, operation and correlation set(s) are active".
According to my understanding, the second definition is the correct one.
Changes: 8 Feb 2006 - new issue
To comment on this issue (including whether it should be accepted), please follow-up to this announcement on the wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org list (replying to this message should automatically send your message to that list), or ensure the subject line as you send it starts "Issue - 244 - [anything]" or is a reply to such a message. If you want to formally propose a resolution to an open issue, please start the subject line "Issue - 244 - Proposed resolution", without any Re: or similar.
To add a new issue, see the issues procedures document (but the address for new issue submission is the sender of this announcement).
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]