Bug 724225 (BRMS-169) - Problems with persistence of processes
Summary: Problems with persistence of processes
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE
Alias: BRMS-169
Product: JBoss Enterprise BRMS Platform 5
Classification: JBoss
Component: unspecified
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
high
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
: 5.0.1
Assignee: Kris Verlaenen
QA Contact:
URL: http://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/BRM...
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2009-07-07 14:32 UTC by nwallace
Modified: 2009-10-05 08:58 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2009-09-01 12:24:13 UTC
Type: Bug


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Issue Tracker BRMS-169 0 None None None Never

Description nwallace 2009-07-07 14:32:22 UTC
Date of First Response: 2009-09-10 01:12:33
securitylevel_name: Public

Unmarshalling of persisted process instances containing variables failing.
Marshalling / unmarshalling or process instances as part of the session also does not use the pluggable process instance marshallers.
Working memory on unmarshalled process instances not set correctly.

Comment 1 nwallace 2009-07-07 14:33:36 UTC
Link: Added: This issue is related to JBRULES-2042


Comment 2 nwallace 2009-09-01 12:24:13 UTC
Fix in place.

Comment 3 David Le Sage 2009-09-10 05:12:33 UTC
For documenting this in the Release Notes, can you please confirm the following and fill in the missing information. Dot point explanations are fine:

The CAUSE (what was actually broken)
 *  Processes were persisting in working memory after  being unmarshalled.
 * Working memory was not being set correctly and "pluggable process instance marshallers" were not being used.

CONSEQUENCES of the bug (how it impacts users.)
 * 

The FIX (what was changed to eliminate this bug) and 
 *

RESULTS of the fix (what now happens for users.)
 * 

Comment 4 David Le Sage 2009-09-23 05:37:09 UTC
We are still awaiting the outstanding information for the Release Notes on this one.  Please provide it as soon as possible. Thanks.

Comment 5 Kris Verlaenen 2009-09-23 13:00:55 UTC
Not sure this should be included, as it is part of unsupported features, but ...

The CAUSE (what was actually broken)
 * Various issues when using the process instance marshallers

CONSEQUENCES of the bug (how it impacts users.)
 * Persistence of running process instances was incorrect

The FIX (what was changed to eliminate this bug) and
 * Various fixes to make sure the process instances are correctly marshalled and unmarshalled

RESULTS of the fix (what now happens for users.)
 * Persistence of process instances should work correctly now.

Comment 6 David Le Sage 2009-10-01 00:57:10 UTC
NOTE:  Inclusion of this in the release notes relies on confirmation as to whether it is in or not.

Comment 7 Dana Mison 2009-10-05 08:58:09 UTC
added to the 5.0.CP01 release notes as resolved:

JBRULES-2042
Processes were persisting in working memory after being unmarshalled.  Working memory was not being set correctly and "pluggable process instance marshallers" were not being used.


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