On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 7:42 PM, Karthick Sankarachary < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > From: Karthick Sankarachary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Subject: Re: Fault exchange between bpel processes > > > To: "Alexis Midon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Cc: [email protected], "Karthick Sankarachary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > 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 > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 < > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > From: Matthieu Riou > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >> > Subject: Re: Fault exchange between bpel > > > processes > > > >> > To: [email protected], > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >> > Date: Wednesday, October 22, 2008, 10:20 AM > > > >> > On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 9:57 PM, Dalys > > > Sebastian > > > >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>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 > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
