Bug 1005436 - timerEvent firing creates extra JoinInstance on a persistent process
Summary: timerEvent firing creates extra JoinInstance on a persistent process
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: JBoss BPMS Platform 6
Classification: Retired
Component: jBPM Core
Version: 6.0.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
high
Target Milestone: ER4
: 6.0.0
Assignee: Maciej Swiderski
QA Contact: Ivo Bek
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2013-09-06 23:01 UTC by Marian Buenosayres
Modified: 2014-08-06 20:11 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-08-06 20:11:38 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
Maven project to test the issue (30.90 KB, application/x-gzip)
2013-09-06 23:01 UTC, Marian Buenosayres
no flags Details

Description Marian Buenosayres 2013-09-06 23:01:37 UTC
Created attachment 795002 [details]
Maven project to test the issue

Attached project with JUnit test to see it:

    A persistent process with two live activities, a workItem and a timerEvent (see attached image
    The workItem fires, and one side of the execution waits in a safe state in the AND join.
    When the timer events, the TimerNodeInstance is notified, but it creates another JoinInstance instead of using the existing one.
    Since it is an AND join, it never continues because one JoinInstance has one incoming connection satisfied, and the other JoinInstance has the other.

If this is due to writing my BPMN2 wrong or a configuration, please let me know. I'm pretty sure the process should be valid as is.

Comment 2 Maciej Swiderski 2013-09-09 17:56:02 UTC
corrected issue with missing level marker for TimerNodeInstance upon it's completion which caused the join node instance to be created.

Committed to both master and 6.0.x
Master
https://github.com/droolsjbpm/jbpm/commit/9f5a54face7e9757744bac730799b2df9cd14135

6.0.x
https://github.com/droolsjbpm/jbpm/commit/bd0f3fe37529aad3b9e214ca4e97eeffc6503fd6

Comment 3 Ivo Bek 2013-10-18 07:31:54 UTC
Verified in BPMS 6.0.0.ER4


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.