Thanks Antoine, But wouldn't it cause the ambigousReceive[1] Error then ?
[1] - http://ode.apache.org/ambiguousreceive.html -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Antoine Toulme Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 12:06 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Tackling bpel:conflictingReceive Error You have to use three different correlation sets, each presenting an unique value so that two correlations cannot happen at the same time. Alternatively, use route to all. On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 23:29, Dhanush Gopinath <[email protected] > wrote: > Hi, > > How do I tackle bpel:conflictingReceive error? I have a process which > has to wait on 3 In Bound Messages simultaneously in a parallel fashion. > The inbound messages are all waiting on same partnerLink, portType and > operation. I am setting same correlation set for all three, but with > different values. But I get the following fault while executing > > > > exec:conflictingReceive > > {Selector plinkInstnace={PartnerLinkInstance > partnerLinkDecl=OPartnerLink#116,scopeInstanceId=719},ckeySet=[{Correlat > ionKey setId=ReviewCS, > values=[ReviewDocCS_1276236527335eb75d24b5596a1b2_-4a5bcf74_129257bf864_ > -7fbc]}],opName=ReviewOutput,oneWay=no,mexId=<null>,idx=0,route=one} > > > > I read from the documentation that even if I give different correlation > sets I will get ambiguousReceive error. So how do I really address this > use case? Or is this use case a wrong one? > > > > Please advice. > > > > Thanks & Regards > > Dhanush Gopinath > > > >
