Yes, creating a new WorkItem to handle those correlations is a good place to start.
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Ed Staub <est...@telcordia.com> wrote: > > Salatino, > > Thanks for your responses. > > I don't see what's relevant in WSHT - but I wasn't very clear about the > problem I'm trying to solve. > > We expect to be using Flow to glue together a lot of existing systems, with > existing async API's, largely transported over JMS. They don't have a > place > to hold onto a Drools-provided correlation ID - they have ad hoc > correlation > ids constructable from common data in the request and response. We will > need to map from these ad hoc ids to the workitem. > > >> Cool, are you planning to implement your own work Item? > I haven't worked out where/how to wire this in yet. > I was hoping someone might point me to this being "on the shelf" somewhere! > > -Ed > -- > View this message in context: > http://n3.nabble.com/Resuming-the-Flow-SESSION-ID-PROCESS-INSTANCE-ID-WORKITEM-ID-tp607507p693778.html > Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > _______________________________________________ > rules-users mailing list > rules-users@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users > -- - http://salaboy.wordpress.com - http://www.jbug.com.ar - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
_______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
