You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@ode.apache.org by Bruno Neves Fiusa <br...@hotmail.com> on 2011/05/06 19:39:32 UTC
Question about using BPEL
Hi,
I am creating a process that should be covered by different clients of mine. Each customer will be in a different step in this process. I am in doubt about using BPEL to address this question, since this process would need to perform several steps at the same time, which to my mind runs away from his purpose.
I'm thinking of using parallelism, but there are dependencies between the steps that must be performed several times for different customers.
Thx a lot!
Bruno Fiusa
"Just do IT."
RE: Question about using BPEL
Posted by Samuel Tamassia Martinez <sa...@hotmail.com>.
As you said, teh specification has a speak really comples, I've tried to learn somethings from there but learned just a few things...
anyway, thank you so much, i'll begin learning about BPEL and WSDL/SOA too(never used a web service before) =]
> Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 22:31:37 +0200
> From: tvanlessen@gmail.com
> To: user@ode.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Question about using BPEL
>
> Hi Samuel,
>
> complex things are described pretty good in the spec [1], however, since
> it's a spec, the speak is quite, well, complex ;)
>
> A good entry point is also the BPEL primer [2].
>
> A good introduction can also be found in Sanjiva et al's book [3].
>
> If you were German, I could recommend our book about BPEL ;)
>
> HTH,
> Tammo
>
> [1] http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsbpel/2.0/wsbpel-v2.0.pdf
> [2] http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsbpel/2.0/Primer/wsbpel-v2.0-Primer.pdf
> [3] http://www.amazon.com/dp/0131488740
>
> On 10.05.2011 18:41, Samuel Tamassia Martinez wrote:
> >
> > Thank you very much for these hints, do you have any site or hint about how you've learned BPEL? I'm newbie and don't know how to make more complex things =/
> > sorry for the spam and thanks once more...
> >
> >> Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 11:37:40 -0400
> >> From: bbrodt@redhat.com
> >> To: user@ode.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: Question about using BPEL
> >>
> >> Yep. For this use-case though, I think a single process would work just fine. @Samuel, have a look at the <forEach> with parallel="yes"
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Bob
> >>
> >> _______________________________________
> >> Robert ("Bob") Brodt
> >> Senior Software Engineer, JBoss Riftsaw
> >> JBoss by Red Hat
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> I'd like to second that. This is also a nice example for using two
> >>> partnerlinks. One for the bi-lateral connection between party host and
> >>> process, and another one for the connection between process and
> >>> potential guests.
> >>>
> >>> Anyhow, you also might think of splitting the process into a
> >>> party-host-process and a invitation-process. The latter is exactly
> >>> like
> >>> the process you have described, the first is in charge to spawn an
> >>> instance of the first process for each guest and then collect the
> >>> results. This is a "request-with-referral" SIP
> >>> (http://math.ut.ee/~dumas/ServiceInteractionPatterns/Animation-Request-with-Referral.html)
> >>>
> >>> I think the important thing is to overcome the procedural thinking.
> >>> Instead of having a single process instance that takes care of
> >>> everything, it is better to have a process instance for each guest so
> >>> that a process instance is directly connected to the state of an
> >>> invitation of a guest.
> >>>
> >>> Tammo
> >>>
> >>> On 10.05.2011 16:27, Bob Brodt wrote:
> >>>> Hmm, here's how I would approach this: A BPEL process, being a
> >>>> *service*, needs to receive some kind of request message to initiate
> >>>> a new process instance. This could be something like you, as the
> >>>> "party host", sending details of your party (guest list, date/time,
> >>>> place, etc.) to the process. The process would then send an
> >>>> invitation to each person on the guest list with an <invoke> on an
> >>>> email service. The <invoke> would have to define a correlation on
> >>>> the party invitation message (like the person's first & last name.)
> >>>> Then use a <pick> with createInstace="yes" to wait for replies. The
> >>>> <onMessage> in the <pick> would use the same correlation data as the
> >>>> <invoke> on the guest's reply email. Presumably you would also set a
> >>>> timeout (probably the R.S.V.P. date for the party) and have an
> >>>> <onAlarm> to handle the "no response" cases. Each email sent to your
> >>>> guests becomes a separate process instance, with the correlation as
> >>>> a "handle", so your would have N+1 instances (N=number
> >>> of guests + 1=the original invitation request) running concurrently.
> >>> BPEL is designed for long running processes, and the runtime (ODE in
> >>> this case) will persist state information, so even if the server
> >>> crashes, your process instances are persisted and will resume when the
> >>> server is restarted.
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________
> >>>> Robert ("Bob") Brodt
> >>>> Senior Software Engineer, JBoss Riftsaw
> >>>> JBoss by Red Hat
> >>>>
> >>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>>> coincidently, I've got one problem similar to this. look, i have
> >>>>> this
> >>>>> case:
> >>>>> I want to make a more complex test of BPEL, so, I'll make a
> >>>>> business
> >>>>> process that send invitations to my party via email. that's the
> >>>>> business process:
> >>>>> 1- send an email with an invitation and ask for answers about who
> >>>>> will
> >>>>> go to the party.2- wait for the answers3- if the answer is 'yes',
> >>>>> send
> >>>>> another email with the party details, else, send an email thanking
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> person for answering.
> >>>>> the problem for me is that how can i wait for some people answer
> >>>>> while
> >>>>> i have to send the feedback emails... the step 3 depends on the
> >>>>> step
> >>>>> 2, but at the same time one person answer my email and i have to
> >>>>> give
> >>>>> the person a feedback, I have to wait other people answer.
> >>>>> I don't know if BPEL can do this. for example, if the server shut
> >>>>> down, would I have to restart all the process(send the invitations
> >>>>> and
> >>>>> wait for all answers again)?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> From: Christophe.Noel@spacebel.be
> >>>>>> To: user@ode.apache.org
> >>>>>> Subject: RE: Question about using BPEL
> >>>>>> Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 15:15:32 +0000
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As you suggest, parallelism should help. I'm not sure about the
> >>>>>> dependencies that you're talking about, but correlations could
> >>>>>> help
> >>>>>> maybe ?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>> From: Samuel Tamassia Martinez
> >>>>>> [mailto:samuel-t-martinez@hotmail.com]
> >>>>>> Sent: lundi 9 mai 2011 17:10
> >>>>>> To: User ODE
> >>>>>> Subject: RE: Question about using BPEL
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> this question looks interesting, I haven't thougt of it, does
> >>>>>> anybody knows about?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> From: brunofiusa@hotmail.com
> >>>>>>> To: user@ode.apache.org
> >>>>>>> Subject: Question about using BPEL
> >>>>>>> Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 14:39:32 -0300
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>> I am creating a process that should be covered by different
> >>>>>>> clients of mine. Each customer will be in a different step in
> >>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>> process. I am in doubt about using BPEL to address this question,
> >>>>>>> since this process would need to perform several steps at the
> >>>>>>> same
> >>>>>>> time, which to my mind runs away from his purpose.
> >>>>>>> I'm thinking of using parallelism, but there are dependencies
> >>>>>>> between the steps that must be performed several times for
> >>>>>>> different customers.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thx a lot!
> >>>>>>> Bruno Fiusa
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "Just do IT."
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -
> >>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> E-MAIL DISCLAIMER
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The present message may contain confidential and/or legally
> >>>>>> privileged information. If you are not the intended addressee and
> >>>>>> in
> >>>>>> case of a transmission error, please notify the sender immediately
> >>>>>> and destroy this E-mail. Disclosure, reproduction or distribution
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>> this document and its possible attachments is strictly forbidden.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> SPACEBEL denies all liability for incomplete, improper,
> >>>>>> inaccurate,
> >>>>>> intercepted, (partly) destroyed, lost and/or belated transmission
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>> the current information given that unencrypted electronic
> >>>>>> transmission cannot currently be guaranteed to be secure or error
> >>>>>> free.
> >>>>>> Upon request or in conformity with formal, contractual agreements,
> >>>>>> an originally signed hard copy will be sent to you to confirm the
> >>>>>> information contained in this E-mail.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> SPACEBEL denies all liability where E-mail is used for private
> >>>>>> use.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> SPACEBEL cannot be held responsible for possible viruses that
> >>>>>> might
> >>>>>> corrupt this message and/or your computer system.
> >>>>>> e
> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Tammo van Lessen - http://www.taval.de
> >
>
> --
> Tammo van Lessen - http://www.taval.de
Re: Question about using BPEL
Posted by Tammo van Lessen <tv...@gmail.com>.
Hi Samuel,
complex things are described pretty good in the spec [1], however, since
it's a spec, the speak is quite, well, complex ;)
A good entry point is also the BPEL primer [2].
A good introduction can also be found in Sanjiva et al's book [3].
If you were German, I could recommend our book about BPEL ;)
HTH,
Tammo
[1] http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsbpel/2.0/wsbpel-v2.0.pdf
[2] http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsbpel/2.0/Primer/wsbpel-v2.0-Primer.pdf
[3] http://www.amazon.com/dp/0131488740
On 10.05.2011 18:41, Samuel Tamassia Martinez wrote:
>
> Thank you very much for these hints, do you have any site or hint about how you've learned BPEL? I'm newbie and don't know how to make more complex things =/
> sorry for the spam and thanks once more...
>
>> Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 11:37:40 -0400
>> From: bbrodt@redhat.com
>> To: user@ode.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Question about using BPEL
>>
>> Yep. For this use-case though, I think a single process would work just fine. @Samuel, have a look at the <forEach> with parallel="yes"
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Bob
>>
>> _______________________________________
>> Robert ("Bob") Brodt
>> Senior Software Engineer, JBoss Riftsaw
>> JBoss by Red Hat
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> I'd like to second that. This is also a nice example for using two
>>> partnerlinks. One for the bi-lateral connection between party host and
>>> process, and another one for the connection between process and
>>> potential guests.
>>>
>>> Anyhow, you also might think of splitting the process into a
>>> party-host-process and a invitation-process. The latter is exactly
>>> like
>>> the process you have described, the first is in charge to spawn an
>>> instance of the first process for each guest and then collect the
>>> results. This is a "request-with-referral" SIP
>>> (http://math.ut.ee/~dumas/ServiceInteractionPatterns/Animation-Request-with-Referral.html)
>>>
>>> I think the important thing is to overcome the procedural thinking.
>>> Instead of having a single process instance that takes care of
>>> everything, it is better to have a process instance for each guest so
>>> that a process instance is directly connected to the state of an
>>> invitation of a guest.
>>>
>>> Tammo
>>>
>>> On 10.05.2011 16:27, Bob Brodt wrote:
>>>> Hmm, here's how I would approach this: A BPEL process, being a
>>>> *service*, needs to receive some kind of request message to initiate
>>>> a new process instance. This could be something like you, as the
>>>> "party host", sending details of your party (guest list, date/time,
>>>> place, etc.) to the process. The process would then send an
>>>> invitation to each person on the guest list with an <invoke> on an
>>>> email service. The <invoke> would have to define a correlation on
>>>> the party invitation message (like the person's first & last name.)
>>>> Then use a <pick> with createInstace="yes" to wait for replies. The
>>>> <onMessage> in the <pick> would use the same correlation data as the
>>>> <invoke> on the guest's reply email. Presumably you would also set a
>>>> timeout (probably the R.S.V.P. date for the party) and have an
>>>> <onAlarm> to handle the "no response" cases. Each email sent to your
>>>> guests becomes a separate process instance, with the correlation as
>>>> a "handle", so your would have N+1 instances (N=number
>>> of guests + 1=the original invitation request) running concurrently.
>>> BPEL is designed for long running processes, and the runtime (ODE in
>>> this case) will persist state information, so even if the server
>>> crashes, your process instances are persisted and will resume when the
>>> server is restarted.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________
>>>> Robert ("Bob") Brodt
>>>> Senior Software Engineer, JBoss Riftsaw
>>>> JBoss by Red Hat
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> coincidently, I've got one problem similar to this. look, i have
>>>>> this
>>>>> case:
>>>>> I want to make a more complex test of BPEL, so, I'll make a
>>>>> business
>>>>> process that send invitations to my party via email. that's the
>>>>> business process:
>>>>> 1- send an email with an invitation and ask for answers about who
>>>>> will
>>>>> go to the party.2- wait for the answers3- if the answer is 'yes',
>>>>> send
>>>>> another email with the party details, else, send an email thanking
>>>>> the
>>>>> person for answering.
>>>>> the problem for me is that how can i wait for some people answer
>>>>> while
>>>>> i have to send the feedback emails... the step 3 depends on the
>>>>> step
>>>>> 2, but at the same time one person answer my email and i have to
>>>>> give
>>>>> the person a feedback, I have to wait other people answer.
>>>>> I don't know if BPEL can do this. for example, if the server shut
>>>>> down, would I have to restart all the process(send the invitations
>>>>> and
>>>>> wait for all answers again)?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Christophe.Noel@spacebel.be
>>>>>> To: user@ode.apache.org
>>>>>> Subject: RE: Question about using BPEL
>>>>>> Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 15:15:32 +0000
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As you suggest, parallelism should help. I'm not sure about the
>>>>>> dependencies that you're talking about, but correlations could
>>>>>> help
>>>>>> maybe ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Samuel Tamassia Martinez
>>>>>> [mailto:samuel-t-martinez@hotmail.com]
>>>>>> Sent: lundi 9 mai 2011 17:10
>>>>>> To: User ODE
>>>>>> Subject: RE: Question about using BPEL
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> this question looks interesting, I haven't thougt of it, does
>>>>>> anybody knows about?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From: brunofiusa@hotmail.com
>>>>>>> To: user@ode.apache.org
>>>>>>> Subject: Question about using BPEL
>>>>>>> Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 14:39:32 -0300
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> I am creating a process that should be covered by different
>>>>>>> clients of mine. Each customer will be in a different step in
>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>> process. I am in doubt about using BPEL to address this question,
>>>>>>> since this process would need to perform several steps at the
>>>>>>> same
>>>>>>> time, which to my mind runs away from his purpose.
>>>>>>> I'm thinking of using parallelism, but there are dependencies
>>>>>>> between the steps that must be performed several times for
>>>>>>> different customers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thx a lot!
>>>>>>> Bruno Fiusa
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Just do IT."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> E-MAIL DISCLAIMER
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The present message may contain confidential and/or legally
>>>>>> privileged information. If you are not the intended addressee and
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> case of a transmission error, please notify the sender immediately
>>>>>> and destroy this E-mail. Disclosure, reproduction or distribution
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> this document and its possible attachments is strictly forbidden.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> SPACEBEL denies all liability for incomplete, improper,
>>>>>> inaccurate,
>>>>>> intercepted, (partly) destroyed, lost and/or belated transmission
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> the current information given that unencrypted electronic
>>>>>> transmission cannot currently be guaranteed to be secure or error
>>>>>> free.
>>>>>> Upon request or in conformity with formal, contractual agreements,
>>>>>> an originally signed hard copy will be sent to you to confirm the
>>>>>> information contained in this E-mail.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> SPACEBEL denies all liability where E-mail is used for private
>>>>>> use.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> SPACEBEL cannot be held responsible for possible viruses that
>>>>>> might
>>>>>> corrupt this message and/or your computer system.
>>>>>> e
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> --
>>> Tammo van Lessen - http://www.taval.de
>
--
Tammo van Lessen - http://www.taval.de
RE: Question about using BPEL
Posted by Samuel Tamassia Martinez <sa...@hotmail.com>.
Thank you very much for these hints, do you have any site or hint about how you've learned BPEL? I'm newbie and don't know how to make more complex things =/
sorry for the spam and thanks once more...
> Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 11:37:40 -0400
> From: bbrodt@redhat.com
> To: user@ode.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Question about using BPEL
>
> Yep. For this use-case though, I think a single process would work just fine. @Samuel, have a look at the <forEach> with parallel="yes"
>
> Cheers,
> Bob
>
> _______________________________________
> Robert ("Bob") Brodt
> Senior Software Engineer, JBoss Riftsaw
> JBoss by Red Hat
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > I'd like to second that. This is also a nice example for using two
> > partnerlinks. One for the bi-lateral connection between party host and
> > process, and another one for the connection between process and
> > potential guests.
> >
> > Anyhow, you also might think of splitting the process into a
> > party-host-process and a invitation-process. The latter is exactly
> > like
> > the process you have described, the first is in charge to spawn an
> > instance of the first process for each guest and then collect the
> > results. This is a "request-with-referral" SIP
> > (http://math.ut.ee/~dumas/ServiceInteractionPatterns/Animation-Request-with-Referral.html)
> >
> > I think the important thing is to overcome the procedural thinking.
> > Instead of having a single process instance that takes care of
> > everything, it is better to have a process instance for each guest so
> > that a process instance is directly connected to the state of an
> > invitation of a guest.
> >
> > Tammo
> >
> > On 10.05.2011 16:27, Bob Brodt wrote:
> > > Hmm, here's how I would approach this: A BPEL process, being a
> > > *service*, needs to receive some kind of request message to initiate
> > > a new process instance. This could be something like you, as the
> > > "party host", sending details of your party (guest list, date/time,
> > > place, etc.) to the process. The process would then send an
> > > invitation to each person on the guest list with an <invoke> on an
> > > email service. The <invoke> would have to define a correlation on
> > > the party invitation message (like the person's first & last name.)
> > > Then use a <pick> with createInstace="yes" to wait for replies. The
> > > <onMessage> in the <pick> would use the same correlation data as the
> > > <invoke> on the guest's reply email. Presumably you would also set a
> > > timeout (probably the R.S.V.P. date for the party) and have an
> > > <onAlarm> to handle the "no response" cases. Each email sent to your
> > > guests becomes a separate process instance, with the correlation as
> > > a "handle", so your would have N+1 instances (N=number
> > of guests + 1=the original invitation request) running concurrently.
> > BPEL is designed for long running processes, and the runtime (ODE in
> > this case) will persist state information, so even if the server
> > crashes, your process instances are persisted and will resume when the
> > server is restarted.
> > >
> > > _______________________________________
> > > Robert ("Bob") Brodt
> > > Senior Software Engineer, JBoss Riftsaw
> > > JBoss by Red Hat
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > >> coincidently, I've got one problem similar to this. look, i have
> > >> this
> > >> case:
> > >> I want to make a more complex test of BPEL, so, I'll make a
> > >> business
> > >> process that send invitations to my party via email. that's the
> > >> business process:
> > >> 1- send an email with an invitation and ask for answers about who
> > >> will
> > >> go to the party.2- wait for the answers3- if the answer is 'yes',
> > >> send
> > >> another email with the party details, else, send an email thanking
> > >> the
> > >> person for answering.
> > >> the problem for me is that how can i wait for some people answer
> > >> while
> > >> i have to send the feedback emails... the step 3 depends on the
> > >> step
> > >> 2, but at the same time one person answer my email and i have to
> > >> give
> > >> the person a feedback, I have to wait other people answer.
> > >> I don't know if BPEL can do this. for example, if the server shut
> > >> down, would I have to restart all the process(send the invitations
> > >> and
> > >> wait for all answers again)?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> From: Christophe.Noel@spacebel.be
> > >>> To: user@ode.apache.org
> > >>> Subject: RE: Question about using BPEL
> > >>> Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 15:15:32 +0000
> > >>>
> > >>> As you suggest, parallelism should help. I'm not sure about the
> > >>> dependencies that you're talking about, but correlations could
> > >>> help
> > >>> maybe ?
> > >>>
> > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>> From: Samuel Tamassia Martinez
> > >>> [mailto:samuel-t-martinez@hotmail.com]
> > >>> Sent: lundi 9 mai 2011 17:10
> > >>> To: User ODE
> > >>> Subject: RE: Question about using BPEL
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> this question looks interesting, I haven't thougt of it, does
> > >>> anybody knows about?
> > >>>
> > >>>> From: brunofiusa@hotmail.com
> > >>>> To: user@ode.apache.org
> > >>>> Subject: Question about using BPEL
> > >>>> Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 14:39:32 -0300
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hi,
> > >>>> I am creating a process that should be covered by different
> > >>>> clients of mine. Each customer will be in a different step in
> > >>>> this
> > >>>> process. I am in doubt about using BPEL to address this question,
> > >>>> since this process would need to perform several steps at the
> > >>>> same
> > >>>> time, which to my mind runs away from his purpose.
> > >>>> I'm thinking of using parallelism, but there are dependencies
> > >>>> between the steps that must be performed several times for
> > >>>> different customers.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thx a lot!
> > >>>> Bruno Fiusa
> > >>>>
> > >>>> "Just do IT."
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> -
> > >>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>
> > >>> E-MAIL DISCLAIMER
> > >>>
> > >>> The present message may contain confidential and/or legally
> > >>> privileged information. If you are not the intended addressee and
> > >>> in
> > >>> case of a transmission error, please notify the sender immediately
> > >>> and destroy this E-mail. Disclosure, reproduction or distribution
> > >>> of
> > >>> this document and its possible attachments is strictly forbidden.
> > >>>
> > >>> SPACEBEL denies all liability for incomplete, improper,
> > >>> inaccurate,
> > >>> intercepted, (partly) destroyed, lost and/or belated transmission
> > >>> of
> > >>> the current information given that unencrypted electronic
> > >>> transmission cannot currently be guaranteed to be secure or error
> > >>> free.
> > >>> Upon request or in conformity with formal, contractual agreements,
> > >>> an originally signed hard copy will be sent to you to confirm the
> > >>> information contained in this E-mail.
> > >>>
> > >>> SPACEBEL denies all liability where E-mail is used for private
> > >>> use.
> > >>>
> > >>> SPACEBEL cannot be held responsible for possible viruses that
> > >>> might
> > >>> corrupt this message and/or your computer system.
> > >>> e
> > >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > --
> > Tammo van Lessen - http://www.taval.de
Re: Question about using BPEL
Posted by Bob Brodt <bb...@redhat.com>.
Yep. For this use-case though, I think a single process would work just fine. @Samuel, have a look at the <forEach> with parallel="yes"
Cheers,
Bob
_______________________________________
Robert ("Bob") Brodt
Senior Software Engineer, JBoss Riftsaw
JBoss by Red Hat
----- Original Message -----
> I'd like to second that. This is also a nice example for using two
> partnerlinks. One for the bi-lateral connection between party host and
> process, and another one for the connection between process and
> potential guests.
>
> Anyhow, you also might think of splitting the process into a
> party-host-process and a invitation-process. The latter is exactly
> like
> the process you have described, the first is in charge to spawn an
> instance of the first process for each guest and then collect the
> results. This is a "request-with-referral" SIP
> (http://math.ut.ee/~dumas/ServiceInteractionPatterns/Animation-Request-with-Referral.html)
>
> I think the important thing is to overcome the procedural thinking.
> Instead of having a single process instance that takes care of
> everything, it is better to have a process instance for each guest so
> that a process instance is directly connected to the state of an
> invitation of a guest.
>
> Tammo
>
> On 10.05.2011 16:27, Bob Brodt wrote:
> > Hmm, here's how I would approach this: A BPEL process, being a
> > *service*, needs to receive some kind of request message to initiate
> > a new process instance. This could be something like you, as the
> > "party host", sending details of your party (guest list, date/time,
> > place, etc.) to the process. The process would then send an
> > invitation to each person on the guest list with an <invoke> on an
> > email service. The <invoke> would have to define a correlation on
> > the party invitation message (like the person's first & last name.)
> > Then use a <pick> with createInstace="yes" to wait for replies. The
> > <onMessage> in the <pick> would use the same correlation data as the
> > <invoke> on the guest's reply email. Presumably you would also set a
> > timeout (probably the R.S.V.P. date for the party) and have an
> > <onAlarm> to handle the "no response" cases. Each email sent to your
> > guests becomes a separate process instance, with the correlation as
> > a "handle", so your would have N+1 instances (N=number
> of guests + 1=the original invitation request) running concurrently.
> BPEL is designed for long running processes, and the runtime (ODE in
> this case) will persist state information, so even if the server
> crashes, your process instances are persisted and will resume when the
> server is restarted.
> >
> > _______________________________________
> > Robert ("Bob") Brodt
> > Senior Software Engineer, JBoss Riftsaw
> > JBoss by Red Hat
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> coincidently, I've got one problem similar to this. look, i have
> >> this
> >> case:
> >> I want to make a more complex test of BPEL, so, I'll make a
> >> business
> >> process that send invitations to my party via email. that's the
> >> business process:
> >> 1- send an email with an invitation and ask for answers about who
> >> will
> >> go to the party.2- wait for the answers3- if the answer is 'yes',
> >> send
> >> another email with the party details, else, send an email thanking
> >> the
> >> person for answering.
> >> the problem for me is that how can i wait for some people answer
> >> while
> >> i have to send the feedback emails... the step 3 depends on the
> >> step
> >> 2, but at the same time one person answer my email and i have to
> >> give
> >> the person a feedback, I have to wait other people answer.
> >> I don't know if BPEL can do this. for example, if the server shut
> >> down, would I have to restart all the process(send the invitations
> >> and
> >> wait for all answers again)?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> From: Christophe.Noel@spacebel.be
> >>> To: user@ode.apache.org
> >>> Subject: RE: Question about using BPEL
> >>> Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 15:15:32 +0000
> >>>
> >>> As you suggest, parallelism should help. I'm not sure about the
> >>> dependencies that you're talking about, but correlations could
> >>> help
> >>> maybe ?
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Samuel Tamassia Martinez
> >>> [mailto:samuel-t-martinez@hotmail.com]
> >>> Sent: lundi 9 mai 2011 17:10
> >>> To: User ODE
> >>> Subject: RE: Question about using BPEL
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> this question looks interesting, I haven't thougt of it, does
> >>> anybody knows about?
> >>>
> >>>> From: brunofiusa@hotmail.com
> >>>> To: user@ode.apache.org
> >>>> Subject: Question about using BPEL
> >>>> Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 14:39:32 -0300
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>> I am creating a process that should be covered by different
> >>>> clients of mine. Each customer will be in a different step in
> >>>> this
> >>>> process. I am in doubt about using BPEL to address this question,
> >>>> since this process would need to perform several steps at the
> >>>> same
> >>>> time, which to my mind runs away from his purpose.
> >>>> I'm thinking of using parallelism, but there are dependencies
> >>>> between the steps that must be performed several times for
> >>>> different customers.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thx a lot!
> >>>> Bruno Fiusa
> >>>>
> >>>> "Just do IT."
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -
> >>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> E-MAIL DISCLAIMER
> >>>
> >>> The present message may contain confidential and/or legally
> >>> privileged information. If you are not the intended addressee and
> >>> in
> >>> case of a transmission error, please notify the sender immediately
> >>> and destroy this E-mail. Disclosure, reproduction or distribution
> >>> of
> >>> this document and its possible attachments is strictly forbidden.
> >>>
> >>> SPACEBEL denies all liability for incomplete, improper,
> >>> inaccurate,
> >>> intercepted, (partly) destroyed, lost and/or belated transmission
> >>> of
> >>> the current information given that unencrypted electronic
> >>> transmission cannot currently be guaranteed to be secure or error
> >>> free.
> >>> Upon request or in conformity with formal, contractual agreements,
> >>> an originally signed hard copy will be sent to you to confirm the
> >>> information contained in this E-mail.
> >>>
> >>> SPACEBEL denies all liability where E-mail is used for private
> >>> use.
> >>>
> >>> SPACEBEL cannot be held responsible for possible viruses that
> >>> might
> >>> corrupt this message and/or your computer system.
> >>> e
> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> --
> Tammo van Lessen - http://www.taval.de
Re: Question about using BPEL
Posted by Tammo van Lessen <tv...@gmail.com>.
I'd like to second that. This is also a nice example for using two
partnerlinks. One for the bi-lateral connection between party host and
process, and another one for the connection between process and
potential guests.
Anyhow, you also might think of splitting the process into a
party-host-process and a invitation-process. The latter is exactly like
the process you have described, the first is in charge to spawn an
instance of the first process for each guest and then collect the
results. This is a "request-with-referral" SIP
(http://math.ut.ee/~dumas/ServiceInteractionPatterns/Animation-Request-with-Referral.html)
I think the important thing is to overcome the procedural thinking.
Instead of having a single process instance that takes care of
everything, it is better to have a process instance for each guest so
that a process instance is directly connected to the state of an
invitation of a guest.
Tammo
On 10.05.2011 16:27, Bob Brodt wrote:
> Hmm, here's how I would approach this: A BPEL process, being a *service*, needs to receive some kind of request message to initiate a new process instance. This could be something like you, as the "party host", sending details of your party (guest list, date/time, place, etc.) to the process. The process would then send an invitation to each person on the guest list with an <invoke> on an email service. The <invoke> would have to define a correlation on the party invitation message (like the person's first & last name.) Then use a <pick> with createInstace="yes" to wait for replies. The <onMessage> in the <pick> would use the same correlation data as the <invoke> on the guest's reply email. Presumably you would also set a timeout (probably the R.S.V.P. date for the party) and have an <onAlarm> to handle the "no response" cases. Each email sent to your guests becomes a separate process instance, with the correlation as a "handle", so your would have N+1 instances (N=number
of guests + 1=the original invitation request) running concurrently. BPEL is designed for long running processes, and the runtime (ODE in this case) will persist state information, so even if the server crashes, your process instances are persisted and will resume when the server is restarted.
>
> _______________________________________
> Robert ("Bob") Brodt
> Senior Software Engineer, JBoss Riftsaw
> JBoss by Red Hat
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> coincidently, I've got one problem similar to this. look, i have this
>> case:
>> I want to make a more complex test of BPEL, so, I'll make a business
>> process that send invitations to my party via email. that's the
>> business process:
>> 1- send an email with an invitation and ask for answers about who will
>> go to the party.2- wait for the answers3- if the answer is 'yes', send
>> another email with the party details, else, send an email thanking the
>> person for answering.
>> the problem for me is that how can i wait for some people answer while
>> i have to send the feedback emails... the step 3 depends on the step
>> 2, but at the same time one person answer my email and i have to give
>> the person a feedback, I have to wait other people answer.
>> I don't know if BPEL can do this. for example, if the server shut
>> down, would I have to restart all the process(send the invitations and
>> wait for all answers again)?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> From: Christophe.Noel@spacebel.be
>>> To: user@ode.apache.org
>>> Subject: RE: Question about using BPEL
>>> Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 15:15:32 +0000
>>>
>>> As you suggest, parallelism should help. I'm not sure about the
>>> dependencies that you're talking about, but correlations could help
>>> maybe ?
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Samuel Tamassia Martinez
>>> [mailto:samuel-t-martinez@hotmail.com]
>>> Sent: lundi 9 mai 2011 17:10
>>> To: User ODE
>>> Subject: RE: Question about using BPEL
>>>
>>>
>>> this question looks interesting, I haven't thougt of it, does
>>> anybody knows about?
>>>
>>>> From: brunofiusa@hotmail.com
>>>> To: user@ode.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Question about using BPEL
>>>> Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 14:39:32 -0300
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>> I am creating a process that should be covered by different
>>>> clients of mine. Each customer will be in a different step in this
>>>> process. I am in doubt about using BPEL to address this question,
>>>> since this process would need to perform several steps at the same
>>>> time, which to my mind runs away from his purpose.
>>>> I'm thinking of using parallelism, but there are dependencies
>>>> between the steps that must be performed several times for
>>>> different customers.
>>>>
>>>> Thx a lot!
>>>> Bruno Fiusa
>>>>
>>>> "Just do IT."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> E-MAIL DISCLAIMER
>>>
>>> The present message may contain confidential and/or legally
>>> privileged information. If you are not the intended addressee and in
>>> case of a transmission error, please notify the sender immediately
>>> and destroy this E-mail. Disclosure, reproduction or distribution of
>>> this document and its possible attachments is strictly forbidden.
>>>
>>> SPACEBEL denies all liability for incomplete, improper, inaccurate,
>>> intercepted, (partly) destroyed, lost and/or belated transmission of
>>> the current information given that unencrypted electronic
>>> transmission cannot currently be guaranteed to be secure or error
>>> free.
>>> Upon request or in conformity with formal, contractual agreements,
>>> an originally signed hard copy will be sent to you to confirm the
>>> information contained in this E-mail.
>>>
>>> SPACEBEL denies all liability where E-mail is used for private use.
>>>
>>> SPACEBEL cannot be held responsible for possible viruses that might
>>> corrupt this message and/or your computer system.
>>> e
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Tammo van Lessen - http://www.taval.de
Re: Question about using BPEL
Posted by Bob Brodt <bb...@redhat.com>.
Hmm, here's how I would approach this: A BPEL process, being a *service*, needs to receive some kind of request message to initiate a new process instance. This could be something like you, as the "party host", sending details of your party (guest list, date/time, place, etc.) to the process. The process would then send an invitation to each person on the guest list with an <invoke> on an email service. The <invoke> would have to define a correlation on the party invitation message (like the person's first & last name.) Then use a <pick> with createInstace="yes" to wait for replies. The <onMessage> in the <pick> would use the same correlation data as the <invoke> on the guest's reply email. Presumably you would also set a timeout (probably the R.S.V.P. date for the party) and have an <onAlarm> to handle the "no response" cases. Each email sent to your guests becomes a separate process instance, with the correlation as a "handle", so your would have N+1 instances (N=number of guests + 1=the original invitation request) running concurrently. BPEL is designed for long running processes, and the runtime (ODE in this case) will persist state information, so even if the server crashes, your process instances are persisted and will resume when the server is restarted.
_______________________________________
Robert ("Bob") Brodt
Senior Software Engineer, JBoss Riftsaw
JBoss by Red Hat
----- Original Message -----
> coincidently, I've got one problem similar to this. look, i have this
> case:
> I want to make a more complex test of BPEL, so, I'll make a business
> process that send invitations to my party via email. that's the
> business process:
> 1- send an email with an invitation and ask for answers about who will
> go to the party.2- wait for the answers3- if the answer is 'yes', send
> another email with the party details, else, send an email thanking the
> person for answering.
> the problem for me is that how can i wait for some people answer while
> i have to send the feedback emails... the step 3 depends on the step
> 2, but at the same time one person answer my email and i have to give
> the person a feedback, I have to wait other people answer.
> I don't know if BPEL can do this. for example, if the server shut
> down, would I have to restart all the process(send the invitations and
> wait for all answers again)?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > From: Christophe.Noel@spacebel.be
> > To: user@ode.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: Question about using BPEL
> > Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 15:15:32 +0000
> >
> > As you suggest, parallelism should help. I'm not sure about the
> > dependencies that you're talking about, but correlations could help
> > maybe ?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Samuel Tamassia Martinez
> > [mailto:samuel-t-martinez@hotmail.com]
> > Sent: lundi 9 mai 2011 17:10
> > To: User ODE
> > Subject: RE: Question about using BPEL
> >
> >
> > this question looks interesting, I haven't thougt of it, does
> > anybody knows about?
> >
> > > From: brunofiusa@hotmail.com
> > > To: user@ode.apache.org
> > > Subject: Question about using BPEL
> > > Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 14:39:32 -0300
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > > I am creating a process that should be covered by different
> > > clients of mine. Each customer will be in a different step in this
> > > process. I am in doubt about using BPEL to address this question,
> > > since this process would need to perform several steps at the same
> > > time, which to my mind runs away from his purpose.
> > > I'm thinking of using parallelism, but there are dependencies
> > > between the steps that must be performed several times for
> > > different customers.
> > >
> > > Thx a lot!
> > > Bruno Fiusa
> > >
> > > "Just do IT."
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > -
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > E-MAIL DISCLAIMER
> >
> > The present message may contain confidential and/or legally
> > privileged information. If you are not the intended addressee and in
> > case of a transmission error, please notify the sender immediately
> > and destroy this E-mail. Disclosure, reproduction or distribution of
> > this document and its possible attachments is strictly forbidden.
> >
> > SPACEBEL denies all liability for incomplete, improper, inaccurate,
> > intercepted, (partly) destroyed, lost and/or belated transmission of
> > the current information given that unencrypted electronic
> > transmission cannot currently be guaranteed to be secure or error
> > free.
> > Upon request or in conformity with formal, contractual agreements,
> > an originally signed hard copy will be sent to you to confirm the
> > information contained in this E-mail.
> >
> > SPACEBEL denies all liability where E-mail is used for private use.
> >
> > SPACEBEL cannot be held responsible for possible viruses that might
> > corrupt this message and/or your computer system.
> > e
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RE: Question about using BPEL
Posted by Samuel Tamassia Martinez <sa...@hotmail.com>.
coincidently, I've got one problem similar to this. look, i have this case:
I want to make a more complex test of BPEL, so, I'll make a business process that send invitations to my party via email. that's the business process:
1- send an email with an invitation and ask for answers about who will go to the party.2- wait for the answers3- if the answer is 'yes', send another email with the party details, else, send an email thanking the person for answering.
the problem for me is that how can i wait for some people answer while i have to send the feedback emails... the step 3 depends on the step 2, but at the same time one person answer my email and i have to give the person a feedback, I have to wait other people answer.
I don't know if BPEL can do this. for example, if the server shut down, would I have to restart all the process(send the invitations and wait for all answers again)?
> From: Christophe.Noel@spacebel.be
> To: user@ode.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Question about using BPEL
> Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 15:15:32 +0000
>
> As you suggest, parallelism should help. I'm not sure about the dependencies that you're talking about, but correlations could help maybe ?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Samuel Tamassia Martinez [mailto:samuel-t-martinez@hotmail.com]
> Sent: lundi 9 mai 2011 17:10
> To: User ODE
> Subject: RE: Question about using BPEL
>
>
> this question looks interesting, I haven't thougt of it, does anybody knows about?
>
> > From: brunofiusa@hotmail.com
> > To: user@ode.apache.org
> > Subject: Question about using BPEL
> > Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 14:39:32 -0300
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> > I am creating a process that should be covered by different clients of mine. Each customer will be in a different step in this process. I am in doubt about using BPEL to address this question, since this process would need to perform several steps at the same time, which to my mind runs away from his purpose.
> > I'm thinking of using parallelism, but there are dependencies between the steps that must be performed several times for different customers.
> >
> > Thx a lot!
> > Bruno Fiusa
> >
> > "Just do IT."
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> - -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> E-MAIL DISCLAIMER
>
> The present message may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. If you are not the intended addressee and in case of a transmission error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy this E-mail. Disclosure, reproduction or distribution of this document and its possible attachments is strictly forbidden.
>
> SPACEBEL denies all liability for incomplete, improper, inaccurate, intercepted, (partly) destroyed, lost and/or belated transmission of the current information given that unencrypted electronic transmission cannot currently be guaranteed to be secure or error free.
> Upon request or in conformity with formal, contractual agreements, an originally signed hard copy will be sent to you to confirm the information contained in this E-mail.
>
> SPACEBEL denies all liability where E-mail is used for private use.
>
> SPACEBEL cannot be held responsible for possible viruses that might corrupt this message and/or your computer system.
> e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RE: Question about using BPEL
Posted by Christophe Noel <Ch...@spacebel.be>.
As you suggest, parallelism should help. I'm not sure about the dependencies that you're talking about, but correlations could help maybe ?
-----Original Message-----
From: Samuel Tamassia Martinez [mailto:samuel-t-martinez@hotmail.com]
Sent: lundi 9 mai 2011 17:10
To: User ODE
Subject: RE: Question about using BPEL
this question looks interesting, I haven't thougt of it, does anybody knows about?
> From: brunofiusa@hotmail.com
> To: user@ode.apache.org
> Subject: Question about using BPEL
> Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 14:39:32 -0300
>
>
> Hi,
> I am creating a process that should be covered by different clients of mine. Each customer will be in a different step in this process. I am in doubt about using BPEL to address this question, since this process would need to perform several steps at the same time, which to my mind runs away from his purpose.
> I'm thinking of using parallelism, but there are dependencies between the steps that must be performed several times for different customers.
>
> Thx a lot!
> Bruno Fiusa
>
> "Just do IT."
>
>
>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-MAIL DISCLAIMER
The present message may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. If you are not the intended addressee and in case of a transmission error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy this E-mail. Disclosure, reproduction or distribution of this document and its possible attachments is strictly forbidden.
SPACEBEL denies all liability for incomplete, improper, inaccurate, intercepted, (partly) destroyed, lost and/or belated transmission of the current information given that unencrypted electronic transmission cannot currently be guaranteed to be secure or error free.
Upon request or in conformity with formal, contractual agreements, an originally signed hard copy will be sent to you to confirm the information contained in this E-mail.
SPACEBEL denies all liability where E-mail is used for private use.
SPACEBEL cannot be held responsible for possible viruses that might corrupt this message and/or your computer system.
e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RE: Question about using BPEL
Posted by Samuel Tamassia Martinez <sa...@hotmail.com>.
this question looks interesting, I haven't thougt of it, does anybody knows about?
> From: brunofiusa@hotmail.com
> To: user@ode.apache.org
> Subject: Question about using BPEL
> Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 14:39:32 -0300
>
>
> Hi,
> I am creating a process that should be covered by different clients of mine. Each customer will be in a different step in this process. I am in doubt about using BPEL to address this question, since this process would need to perform several steps at the same time, which to my mind runs away from his purpose.
> I'm thinking of using parallelism, but there are dependencies between the steps that must be performed several times for different customers.
>
> Thx a lot!
> Bruno Fiusa
>
> "Just do IT."
>
>
>