This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.

Bug 90125 - bpel validation wrt correlations
Summary: bpel validation wrt correlations
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: soa
Classification: Unclassified
Component: BPEL Validation (show other bugs)
Version: 6.x
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P3 blocker (vote)
Assignee: Vladimir Yaroslavskiy
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-11-28 04:30 UTC by kiran_bhumana
Modified: 2008-02-29 12:14 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Exception Reporter:

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description kiran_bhumana 2006-11-28 04:30:15 UTC 
Refer to the process definition below. It will be good if we can catch and warn
the user about this. Why would anyone create a BPEL, have a receive with
createInstance=yes, but with correlation-initiate=”no”? This should be caught by
validation. In this case it is a user error.



<process>

 

   <sequence>

      <receive name="Receive1" createInstance="yes" partnerLink="PartnerLink1"
operation="correlationRecRecOperation" portType="ns1:correlationRecRecPortType"
variable="CorrelationRecRecOperationIn1">

            <correlations>

                <correlation set="cSet1"

                             initiate="no"/>

            </correlations>

      </receive>         

      <receive name="Receive2" createInstance="no" partnerLink="PartnerLink2"
operation="correlationRecRecOperation1"
portType="ns1:correlationRecRecPortType1" variable="CorrelationRecRecOperation1In1">

            <correlations>

                <correlation set="cSet1"

                             initiate="no"/>

            </correlations>

      </receive>

          

   </sequence>

   

</process>
Comment 1 Michael Frisino 2006-11-29 11:45:12 UTC 
According to Ron Ten Hov:

   If I understand your use-case correctly, it is possible to have a process
that doesn't use correlation. If the process starts with a <receive> (and
createInstance="yes"), it may never have another <receive> (or <onMessage>) that
needs to be correlated to the instance. The example process given in section 5.1
of the specification shows such a process.

Therefore, I am changing this issue status to invalid.
Comment 2 kiran_bhumana 2006-11-29 19:53:49 UTC 
This is not invalid. I am reopening this so i don't forget to do so later. If
the email discussion says it is invlid, i will invalidate it.
Comment 3 kiran_bhumana 2007-04-03 17:34:42 UTC 
This is a bug that will help the users. This is neither difficult to implement
nor  something too complicated to understand. So i changed it to defect and to
be fixed for NB 6.0. I might not hava chosen the milestone correctly, please
correct it.

the requirement is simple, for a receive that creates an instance, as shown in
the bpel earlier, if a correlation tag is used, the only possible way to use the
correlation is to initiate it. i.e. it should have been like the following.

      <receive name="Receive1" createInstance="yes" ...>

            <correlations>

                <correlation set="cSet1"

                             initiate="yes"/>

            </correlations>

      </receive>
Comment 4 Sergey Lunegov 2007-10-25 12:01:14 UTC 
For Sierra.
Comment 5 Andrei Chistiakov 2008-01-17 11:09:24 UTC 
Changed target milestone from Sierra to 6.1 in order to display correct info on
NB 6.1 dashboard
Comment 6 Vladimir Yaroslavskiy 2008-02-29 12:14:02 UTC 
fixed.