ode-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Matthieu Riou" <matth...@offthelip.org>
Subject Re: Fault exchange between bpel processes
Date Fri, 24 Oct 2008 03:41:38 GMT
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 7:42 PM, Karthick Sankarachary <
sankarachary@intalio.com> wrote:

> Hi Dalys,
>
> Just to be clear, when you throw a fault after a <receive> activity, it
> will
> not magically propagate back to the invoker as a response. In fact, no
> reply
> will be sent for any inbound message activity that was open at the point
> the
> fault was thrown. If the fault is not caught, the fault throwing process
> will cease to exist, and the invoker will and should eventually timeout.
>

Mmmh actually the behavior in that case isn't dictated by the BPEL spec. But
letting the fault bubbling back to the caller and not letting it timeout is
a sensible thing to do. So that's what ODE does :) I believe most other
implementations behave similarly.

Matthieu


>
> I suggest replacing the <throw> with a <reply> activity, like so:
>
> -        <bpws:throw faultName="fault:TestFault"
> faultVariable="testFault"/>
> +       <bpws:reply faultName="fault:TestFault" variable="testFault"
> partnerLink="..." portType="..." .../>
>
> Hope it helps.
>
> Best Regards,
> Karthick Sankarachary
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 7:08 PM, Dalys Sebastian
> <sebastian_dalys@yahoo.com>wrote:
>
> > Hi Karthick,
> >
> > Here's the complete package attached. Earlier in the day I had sent all 5
> > files, but only 3 made it to the mailing list. Sorry about that. Please
> let
> > me know if you have any trouble receiving it.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dalys
> >
> >
> > --- On Thu, 10/23/08, Karthick Sankarachary <sankarachary@intalio.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > From: Karthick Sankarachary <sankarachary@intalio.com>
> > > Subject: Re: Fault exchange between bpel processes
> > > To: "Alexis Midon" <midon@intalio.com>
> > > Cc: user@ode.apache.org, "Karthick Sankarachary" <karthick@intalio.com
> >
> > > Date: Thursday, October 23, 2008, 7:31 PM
> > > I just want to point out that throwing a fault in the middle
> > > of a <receive>-
> > > <reply> pair is not the same as replying with a fault
> > > name in the response.
> > > In light of that, I don't think Dalys' issue is
> > > related to
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ODE-401. Like
> > > Matthieu said, it would
> > > help to have the complete BPEL project.
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Karthick Sankarachary
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 5:24 PM, Alexis Midon
> > > <midon@intalio.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > It seems to me that your issue and the jira ODE-401
> > > are very similar.
> > > > and I think Karthick is baking a patch.
> > > >
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ODE-401
> > > >
> > > > Alexis
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Dalys Sebastian <
> > > > sebastian_dalys@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi Matthieu,
> > > >>
> > > >> Thank you for your response. To better
> > > troubleshoot this problem, I went
> > > >> and created test process samples that would easily
> > > reproduce the problem.
> > > >>
> > > >> In this sample, there are 5 files: The first 2
> > > files implement the
> > > >> WSFaultThrower process that just throws a fault.
> > > The next 2 files implement
> > > >> the WSFaultInvoker process that invokes the
> > > WSFaultThrower process. This
> > > >> process then should catch the fault thrown by
> > > WSFaultThrower and then
> > > >> rethrow a new fault to the client.
> > > >>
> > > >> WSFaultThrower.wsdl
> > > >> WSFaultThrower.bpel
> > > >> WSFaultInvoker.wsdl
> > > >> WSFaultInvoker.bpel
> > > >> deploy.xml
> > > >>
> > > >> I could reproduce the problem by creating soap-ui
> > > projects that could
> > > >> invoke both services separately. When I invoke
> > > FaultThrower service, it just
> > > >> throws a standard soap fault to me. But when I
> > > invoke WSFaultInvoker, it
> > > >> just times out instead of throwing a fault as
> > > well.
> > > >>
> > > >> Please let me know if I am doing something wrong.
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >> Dalys
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --- On Wed, 10/22/08, Matthieu Riou
> > > <matthieu@offthelip.org> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > From: Matthieu Riou
> > > <matthieu@offthelip.org>
> > > >> > Subject: Re: Fault exchange between bpel
> > > processes
> > > >> > To: user@ode.apache.org,
> > > sebastian_dalys@yahoo.com
> > > >> > Date: Wednesday, October 22, 2008, 10:20 AM
> > > >> > On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 9:57 PM, Dalys
> > > Sebastian
> > > >> > <sebastian_dalys@yahoo.com>wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Hi everyone,
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > I have 2 bpel processes running within
> > > the same folder
> > > >> > under
> > > >> > > WEB-INF/processes. My first bpel calls
> > > my second bpel
> > > >> > via an invoke activity
> > > >> > > and the second bpel throws a soap
> > > standard fault. But,
> > > >> > my first bpel process
> > > >> > > cannot catch it.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > In my first bpel, I have set:
> > > >> > > <ext:failureHandling
> > > >> >
> > > xmlns:ext="http://ode.apache.org/activityRecovery">
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > <ext:faultOnFailure>true</ext:faultOnFailure>
> > > >> > > </ext:failureHandling>
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > I tested the operation of my second bpel
> > > via soap-ui
> > > >> > and I can see that it
> > > >> > > correctly returns a soap-fault. The
> > > soap-fault looks
> > > >> > exactly like the
> > > >> > > specifications and is a standard soap
> > > fault.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > But, when the same operation of the
> > > second bpel is
> > > >> > called by my first bpel,
> > > >> > > the fault cannot be caught by the first
> > > bpel. I have a
> > > >> > catchAll inserted in
> > > >> > > the invoke activity to catch the fault.
> > > Could anyone
> > > >> > please help out? (I am
> > > >> > > using ode 1.2)
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Could you provide your whole deployment so I
> > > can have a
> > > >> > look at it and
> > > >> > eventually reproduce the problem?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Thanks,
> > > >> > Matthieu
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Thanks,
> > > >> > > Dalys
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > >> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > >> > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best
> > > spam
> > > >> > protection around
> > > >> > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > > >> > >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message