| Author |
Message
|
| newbiedude |
 Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 8:55 am Post subject: automatic activities |
 |
|
Voyager
Joined: 22 Dec 2002
Posts: 87
|
Hi all,
If i had a set of tasks (2 tasks) that used to be manual tasks. Now that I have made them automatic, I was wondering how will I be able to monitor these (previously manual task) should they fail? Is there a way I can monitor that in workflow? Thnx. Nathan.
_________________
Newbiedude |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Ratan |
| Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 9:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 18 Jul 2002
Posts: 1245
|
Are you using UPES for the automatic activities.
Failing can happen in multiple ways:
WF never getting the response from UPES. In this case your activity will remain in running state.
WF getting an error response. In this case activity will move to 'In Error' state.
_________________
-Ratan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| newbiedude |
| Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 9:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 22 Dec 2002
Posts: 87
|
thanks Ratan. Yes basically i am using an asynchronous UPES call and it points to a queue that doesn't actually exist.
Another thing is if this process instance calls this task 1000 times, doesn't that mean that 1000 work items are created for it? Is there a way to turn that off (in either a manual task mode or automatic task mode)?
_________________
Newbiedude |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jmac |
| Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 9:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Jun 2001
Posts: 3081
Location: EmeriCon, LLC
|
| newbiedude wrote: |
| Yes basically i am using an asynchronous UPES call and it points to a queue that doesn't actually exist. |
Are you sure this is what you want to do? If the Queue Doesnt exist then what's the point. Perhaps I am missing something. Is this a NOOP?
| Quote: |
| Another thing is if this process instance calls this task 1000 times, doesn't that mean that 1000 work items are created for it? Is there a way to turn that off (in either a manual task mode or automatic task mode)? |
So, how is this happening? If it is inside a block that Executes 1000 times then in the manual mode this would mean work items were created 1000 times. With an automatic task that is implemented via UPES no workitems are created, unless an error is encountered.
_________________
John McDonald
RETIRED |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| newbiedude |
| Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 9:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 22 Dec 2002
Posts: 87
|
Jmac, thanks for thr reply.
Yes I am using the internal NOOP. Actually I have the parent process which was done by another developer about 1 year and half ago and basically what he did was that he had the parent process eg. A call a sub process B, in which there are a bunch of manual activities. is that a bad design. I didn't think it is, apart from the fact that a sub process is used, which i have heard is more expensive.
does that clear things up a bit? Thank you, Nathan.
_________________
Newbiedude |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jmac |
| Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Jun 2001
Posts: 3081
Location: EmeriCon, LLC
|
OK, so the first issue is now moot, a NOOP should be used exactly as you indicate, and I assume that the NOOP is there because you have a decision to make at the beginning of the process.
As to the second issue, are you saying that you are invoking the subprocess 1000 times for each process instance?
I am afraid I still don't understand
_________________
John McDonald
RETIRED |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| newbiedude |
| Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 11:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 22 Dec 2002
Posts: 87
|
Yes John. The NOOP is being used for decision making purposes. As far as your question goes in regards to whether or not the sub-process is being invoked over and over I guess, the answer to that is YES.(The sub-process get's called for the number of orders that failed, for the rest it doesn't need to invoke the subprocess)
Because the at that point in the step, there needs to be a verification on orders, we need looping so basically we put the sub-process in a block. The sub process contains a lot of the logic that needs to be done, I think at the time that this was being designed, it was decided to write the code once(throw that into a sub-process) and call it from whereever you need it. the FDL performs quite well and we have it running on a windows machine. -Nathan
_________________
Newbiedude |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jmac |
| Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Jun 2001
Posts: 3081
Location: EmeriCon, LLC
|
If I am understanding you correctly you have a large overhead here. You indicated that there could be 1000 executions of the block, and the block contains a subprocess... The block costs you .8 BWU the Subprocess costs you 3.9 BWU, for a total of 4.7BWU * 1000 * number of instances. Be sure that you size this properly or you may have performance issues.
_________________
John McDonald
RETIRED |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| manoj |
| Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 30 Jan 2002
Posts: 237
Location: Virgina
|
Probably you can bring some of the logic outside the subprocess and put directly inside the block as activities. This logic can deicde whether to invoke the subprocess or not..just a thought....
_________________
-manoj |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| praveenchhangani |
| Posted: Tue May 25, 2004 11:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Disciple
Joined: 20 Sep 2002
Posts: 192
Location: Chicago, IL
|
Nathan,
If possible, I would recommend a change in design here. Unless there are specific reasons as to why you need such logic in such a design, please consider the cost for the block, the sub-process and the cost for sub-process invocation as well as John mentioned. This might lead to some overhead in the workflow execution servers.
Have you estimated the cost of your process on your server using the following: ?
http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=203&uid=swg24006573&loc=en_US&cs=utf-8&lang=en
Thanks
_________________
Praveen K. Chhangani,
IBM Certified Solutions Designer -
MQ Workflow 3.4. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wfadmin |
| Posted: Tue May 25, 2004 12:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 10
|
I am very new to workflow have been in software design for a number of years. What I don't get though is why IBM creates such stuff in the first place that causes a performance overhead and then has everyone refine it. Shouldn't this be a consideration that's made at the time of software design?
Again I am very new to workflow so may be you guys know more about the workflow scars, but it doesn't take an expert to figure this out. Anyway, just my opinion.
-John. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| manoj |
| Posted: Tue May 25, 2004 12:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 30 Jan 2002
Posts: 237
Location: Virgina
|
you have to use it correctly... It's my opinion that most people jump in to their design without reading the manuals or correcly understanding the product.
If used correctly mq workflow is a very good product
_________________
-manoj |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jmac |
| Posted: Wed May 26, 2004 7:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Jun 2001
Posts: 3081
Location: EmeriCon, LLC
|
| manoj wrote: |
| If used correctly mq workflow is a very good product |
Agreed, except maybe I would say it is the "Best" general purpose workflow engine available.
_________________
John McDonald
RETIRED |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| praveenchhangani |
| Posted: Wed May 26, 2004 10:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Disciple
Joined: 20 Sep 2002
Posts: 192
Location: Chicago, IL
|
| Quote: |
Agreed, except maybe I would say it is the "Best" general purpose workflow engine available.
|
While I agree with your comments about the IBM workflow engine, I would also take this opportunity to point out that the Microsoft Biztalk Server 2004 is also another emerging player in the game and based on what they are coming out (Visual Studio.NET development integration with Biztalk server 04, along with application integration with Microsoft Office products and Visio), I think they will definitely have a number of eyebrows raised. I am not too sure about the pricing however 
_________________
Praveen K. Chhangani,
IBM Certified Solutions Designer -
MQ Workflow 3.4. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wfadmin |
| Posted: Wed May 26, 2004 11:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 10
|
Praveen:
Is there a link to the Biztalk Workflow site?
Thank you,
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
