This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.

Bug 109412 - correlation validation for duplicate initiate "yes"
Summary: correlation validation for duplicate initiate "yes"
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: soa
Classification: Unclassified
Component: BPEL Validation (show other bugs)
Version: 6.x
Hardware: All All
: P2 blocker (vote)
Assignee: Vladimir Yaroslavskiy
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-07-11 19:21 UTC by kiran_bhumana
Modified: 2007-11-26 14:20 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Issue Type: ENHANCEMENT
Exception Reporter:


Attachments
validation project (12.69 KB, application/octet-stream)
2007-07-11 19:22 UTC, kiran_bhumana
Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description kiran_bhumana 2007-07-11 19:21:59 UTC
In the entire BPEL, a correlation set can be initiated only once. (A correlation set name is unique within it's scope). 
If a correlation set is attempted to initiate a second time, editor needs to throw an error saying that this leads to
runtime issues and this is mostly a user error. 

See the attached project.
Comment 1 kiran_bhumana 2007-07-11 19:22:43 UTC
Created attachment 44966 [details]
validation project
Comment 2 kiran_bhumana 2007-07-11 19:25:01 UTC
The tricky part is that if there is a "if" block or some such equivalent constructs, we can't easily determine if the
correlation will result in a duplicate initiation or not. We need to take care of such a situation.
Comment 3 kiran_bhumana 2007-07-11 19:27:23 UTC
in the attached project's BPEL,  <correlation set="CorrelationSet1" initiate="yes"/> is defined twice and it is wrong.
Comment 4 Sergey Lunegov 2007-08-06 12:16:47 UTC
Implementation of this feature will take much time. Will not be able to fix it in current release.
Comment 5 kiran_bhumana 2007-08-06 16:51:24 UTC
 
 I won't disagree on you pushing back this validation, but we should at least do a minimum validation that will help the
user. As a simplified version of this validation,
we will see if there are any duplicate initialization of the correlation. Forget about "if" and other paths which
complicate this validation. If there is a duplicate validation,
we point to the user saying that the during runtime it could potentially have a problem. This will be a warning and not
an error. If this corrects 70% of the users we are definitely better off. I am CC-ing Sergey and Gabe so they understand
this issue to allocate time for this. I am guessing that this sort of validation shouldn't take too much time.
Comment 6 Vladimir Yaroslavskiy 2007-11-26 14:20:13 UTC
fixed in Sierra.