AW: [smila-dev] RE: FYI :: new feature :: Message Resequencer

[<Daniel.Stucky@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Yes, you do :-)
It's not a missconfiguration.

Imagine that a workflow is not expressed with a single pipeline but by using multiple pipelines. The pipelines are connected via different Queues. So you would have the following walktrough:

Connectivity -> Queue1 -> Pipeline1 -> Queue2 ->Pipeline2 -> ... QueueN -> PipelineN

Before each Queue is a Router and after each Queue is a Listener. You only want to unlock the record after PipelineN has finished processing.

Such a setup is useful to achieve a better scalability. And I guess you have already seen such setups :-)

Bye,
Daniel


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: smila-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:smila-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Igor.Novakovic@xxxxxxxxxxx
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 8. Oktober 2009 12:09
An: smila-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: AW: [smila-dev] RE: FYI :: new feature :: Message Resequencer

Hi Daniel,

> I fully understand what you propose, but it just doesn't work when you
have
> multiple Queues and so multiple processing pipelines. As you would
remove the lock
> just after the first pipeline has finished, but the lock must only be
removed if
> the full workflow (all pipelines are completed or processing is
stopped because of
> some error.
You mean the situation where the router sends _the same_ record to two
or more queues and therefore more than one pipelines are executed?
IMO this would be the clear case of misconfiguration.
Or am I missing something?

Regards
Igor
_______________________________________________
smila-dev mailing list
smila-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/smila-dev