Sebastian Schneider [http://community.jboss.org/people/sebastian.s] replied to 
the discussion

"jBPM DispatcherThread : J2SE and JEE behavior"

To view the discussion, visit: http://community.jboss.org/message/540215#540215

--------------------------------------------------------------
Hello zecas,

if I understand your post correctly it seems to me that you have misunderstood 
the way jBPM works. Please read the section about asynchronous continuations in 
the jBPM documentation. The section explains jBPM's behaviour quite well.

If you invoke a jBPM operation  - as starting a process for example - the 
process is executed in the same java thread as the invocation originates from. 
The process is then executed till it reaches a state where no further 
activities can be executed. This is the case if the process arrives in a 
waiting state or in a user task for example. If you don't want this behaviour 
you can use the async-setting on nodes. This tells jBPM to execute the node via 
the JobExecutor. The JobExecutor is reponsible for continuing the execution as 
well as for the execution of timers.

The JobExecutor itself is a thread which need to be started on jBPM 
initialization. Speaking of jBPM 3.2 this can be achieved via the JobExecutor 
servlet for example. For the actual execution of activities the JobExecutor 
maintains a pool of threads to perform the work. You can configure how many 
threads should be created.

P.S.: You did not mention which version of jBPM you are using but the overall 
behaviour should be the same for both jBPM 3.2 and 4.x.

HTH
Sebastian

--------------------------------------------------------------

Reply to this message by going to Community
[http://community.jboss.org/message/540215#540215]

Start a new discussion in jBPM at Community
[http://community.jboss.org/choose-container!input.jspa?contentType=1&containerType=14&container=2034]

_______________________________________________
jboss-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user

Reply via email to