| Author |
Message
|
| Vladimir |
 Posted: Fri Nov 15, 2002 4:47 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Acolyte
Joined: 14 Nov 2002
Posts: 73
Location: USA, CA, Bay Area
|
| jmac wrote: |
Say activty "A" is on the worklist of 5 users. U1, U2, U3, U4, U5. Now U2 works the activity but it fails the Exit condition. If this activity "A" is not in a block by itself, it will only exist in a "READY" state on the worklist of U2. BUT if you put the activity in a Block, and have the Block Fail the exit condition, it will be back on all 5 worklists in a "READY" state.
|
Will it be like this even if we restart the activity using the agent that is kicking activities that are waiting to be restated?
| jmac wrote: |
| In this case I would choos eth JHPB |
It is my choice too. 
But I still trying to force it running in my test installation. 
| jmac wrote: |
| This is similar to the Staffing above... |
I've just sent my thoughts on this in the reply to lazeknight. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| jmac |
| Posted: Sat Nov 16, 2002 5:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Jun 2001
Posts: 3081
Location: EmeriCon, LLC
|
Vladimir:
I am not certain that I understand what you are getting at?
| Quote: |
| Will it be like this even if we restart the activity using the agent that is kicking activities that are waiting to be restated? |
Unless you wrote something there is no agent (or anything else other than a human) that is going to restart an activity.
| Quote: |
| But I still trying to force it running in my test installation. |
I have not had trouble with the Bridge in the past, but I must admit I have never used it on 332, and maybe not even on 330, we do all of this with UPES activities and have our own component that makes dealing with UPES quite simple.
_________________
John McDonald
RETIRED |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Ratan |
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2002 9:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 18 Jul 2002
Posts: 1245
|
John,
| Quote: |
Vladimir:
I am not certain that I understand what you are getting at?
Quote:
Will it be like this even if we restart the activity using the agent that is kicking activities that are waiting to be restated?
Unless you wrote something there is no agent (or anything else other than a human) that is going to restart an activity.
|
If I am not missing something, I thought I can always write an agent which can start/finish/forceRestart/forceFinish an activity. Isn't that possible?
-Laze |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jmac |
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2002 9:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Jun 2001
Posts: 3081
Location: EmeriCon, LLC
|
Laze:
The way I interpreted what Vladimir said was that this was that this was not code that he wrote, but something that was being done somehow automatically.
What you say is of course true, you can write code to do this. This is just not how I interpreted the original question.
| Quote: |
Posted: 15 Nov 2002 17:08 Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jmac:
1) Sorry, I forgot to ask you in the previous post - how can block help us to restart activity automatically? Could you, please, give me some hints? I really want to use it if it is possible... |
_________________
John McDonald
RETIRED |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vladimir |
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2002 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Acolyte
Joined: 14 Nov 2002
Posts: 73
Location: USA, CA, Bay Area
|
John,
We are planning to have our own agent running and kicking sleeping activities. It will do some other smart work of course. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vladimir |
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2002 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Acolyte
Joined: 14 Nov 2002
Posts: 73
Location: USA, CA, Bay Area
|
John,
We are using UPES right now, but it is kind a problematic to continue with this style, because we will have different kind of processes and activities in the nearest future and some of them are small and fast, some will be slow (several minutes, up to half an hour). We do not want to implement asynchronous messaging there. Just because it will imply another development efforts. We would rather use JHPB instead. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jmac |
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2002 5:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Jun 2001
Posts: 3081
Location: EmeriCon, LLC
|
Vladimir:
Have you considered building in the ability to run a program (via Checkout/Checkin) into your "agent"? I really don't know enough about what you are doing to know if this would work.
If you are going to use JHPB for a lot of work I would be sure to talk to the lab and give them the particulars and make sure they think it will work for you.
GOOD LUCK
_________________
John McDonald
RETIRED |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vladimir |
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2002 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Acolyte
Joined: 14 Nov 2002
Posts: 73
Location: USA, CA, Bay Area
|
John,
We are planning to have an agent just to restart sleeping activities, do some e-amil notifications based on worklists and so on, we do not plan to use it as a PEA, no programs will be launched based on the sleeping activity configurations. We are not planning even to use "Check in/ Check out" in the agent. At least for now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vladimir |
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2002 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Acolyte
Joined: 14 Nov 2002
Posts: 73
Location: USA, CA, Bay Area
|
John,
Why do you think JHPB cannot handle a lot of activities running simultaneously? Actually, in our case we will have reasonable number of programs, executing in parallel. Up to 10 I expect. But normally it will be 1. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jmac |
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2002 11:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Jun 2001
Posts: 3081
Location: EmeriCon, LLC
|
Vladimir:
It's not that I don't think the bridge can handle it, it's just that I don't know that it has been used that thoroughly. Like I said before, I am aware of only 1 use of the bridge in a production environment, and it was not something that was going to be hit very heavily.
Before going into production, I would certainly estimate my load and run it by the Lab.
_________________
John McDonald
RETIRED |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vladimir |
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2002 11:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Acolyte
Joined: 14 Nov 2002
Posts: 73
Location: USA, CA, Bay Area
|
We will, for sure... 
And we will even try to bless this solution by IBM (I want to use all money we are paying them for support  ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Ratan |
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2002 12:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 18 Jul 2002
Posts: 1245
|
Is this JHPB solution being used for fat client solution or a thin client solution? I wonder if it is any useful to use it for a thin client?
-Laze |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jmac |
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2002 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Jun 2001
Posts: 3081
Location: EmeriCon, LLC
|
Laze:
It is my opinion that any start (as opposed to Checkout/Checkin) issued by the thin client defeats the purpose of using the thin client. I have done starts from the thin client to see if it works (It did), but if you want to do them, you still need to have an MQWF client installed on each users workstation, as opposed to only needing a browser.
_________________
John McDonald
RETIRED |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vladimir |
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2002 1:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Acolyte
Joined: 14 Nov 2002
Posts: 73
Location: USA, CA, Bay Area
|
We are using thin client and we have WF server, where UPES is running and where JHPB will be running later.
Clients are preparing XMLs and sending them through the WebServer to the WF server.
Processes (and PEA) are running on one single WF server.
That's our design. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| vennela |
| Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2002 11:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 4055
Location: Hyderabad, India
|
Vladimir:
| Quote: |
| And we will even try to bless this solution by IBM (I want to use all money we are paying them for support ) |
Oh OK. Looks like it was a fat check. So you have a reason to be indignant about the support you get. My bad. I am sorry about the post in the previous thread then.
---
Venny |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
