Petals CDK

MONIT traces are not correctly managed when expiration of asynchronous messages

Details

  • Type: Bug Bug
  • Status: Resolved Resolved
  • Priority: Major Major
  • Resolution: Fixed
  • Affects Version/s: 5.2.0, 5.3.0
  • Fix Version/s: 5.6.0
  • Component/s: None
  • Security Level: Public
  • Description:
    Hide

    If a service provider is invoked asynchronously (unblocking call), we get following MONIT traces (for a MEP InOut):

    1. provider side: provideFlowStepBegin,
    2. sub-provider #1 side (another provider invoked asynchronously): provideFlowStepBegin,
    3. sub-provider #2 side (another provider invoked asynchronously): provideFlowStepBegin,
    4. sub-provider #1 side: provideFlowStepEnd
    5. provider side (the expiration occurs): provideFlowStepEnd. We won't return an error if a time-out occurs
    6. sub-provider #2 side (when the processing ends normally): provideFlowStepEnd.

    Point #5: it's normal to have a 'provideFlowStepEnd' because it's based on the reply returns to the consumer of the main provider. In case of an orchestration, if a timout occurs, a response that is not an error or a fault can be returned.

    The expiration does not appear anywhere. And its very difficult to understand point 5 and 6 in temporal point of view.

    Show
    If a service provider is invoked asynchronously (unblocking call), we get following MONIT traces (for a MEP InOut):
    1. provider side: provideFlowStepBegin,
    2. sub-provider #1 side (another provider invoked asynchronously): provideFlowStepBegin,
    3. sub-provider #2 side (another provider invoked asynchronously): provideFlowStepBegin,
    4. sub-provider #1 side: provideFlowStepEnd
    5. provider side (the expiration occurs): provideFlowStepEnd. We won't return an error if a time-out occurs
    6. sub-provider #2 side (when the processing ends normally): provideFlowStepEnd.
    Point #5: it's normal to have a 'provideFlowStepEnd' because it's based on the reply returns to the consumer of the main provider. In case of an orchestration, if a timout occurs, a response that is not an error or a fault can be returned. The expiration does not appear anywhere. And its very difficult to understand point 5 and 6 in temporal point of view.
  • Environment:
    -

Issue Links

Activity

Christophe DENEUX made changes - Mon, 4 Jun 2012 - 17:03:07 +0200
Field Original Value New Value
Assignee Mathieu Carrolle [ mcarrolle ]
Priority Major [ 3 ]
Christophe DENEUX made changes - Mon, 4 Jun 2012 - 17:03:26 +0200
Fix Version/s 5.4.0 [ 10362 ]
Christophe DENEUX made changes - Tue, 24 Sep 2013 - 09:27:28 +0200
Fix Version/s VNext [ 10406 ]
Fix Version/s 5.4.0 [ 10362 ]
Christophe DENEUX made changes - Mon, 7 Sep 2015 - 11:51:28 +0200
Description If a service provider is invoked asynchronously (unblocking call), we get following MONIT traces (for a MEP InOut):
# provider side: provideFlowStepBegin,
# sub-provider #1 side (another provider invoked asynchronously): provideFlowStepBegin,
# sub-provider #2 side (another provider invoked asynchronously): provideFlowStepBegin,
# sub-provider #1 side: provideFlowStepEnd
# provider side (the expiration occurs): provideFlowStepEnd
# sub-provider #2 side (when the processing ends normally): provideFlowStepEnd.

Point #5: it's normal to have a 'provideFlowStepEnd' because it's based on the reply returns to the consumer of the main provider. In case of an orchestration, if a timout occurs, a response that is not an error or a fault can be returned.

The expiration does not appear anywhere. And its very difficult to understand point 5 and 6 in temporal point of view.
If a service provider is invoked asynchronously (unblocking call), we get following MONIT traces (for a MEP InOut):
# provider side: {{provideFlowStepBegin}},
# sub-provider #1 side (another provider invoked asynchronously): {{provideFlowStepBegin}},
# sub-provider #2 side (another provider invoked asynchronously): {{provideFlowStepBegin}},
# sub-provider #1 side: {{provideFlowStepEnd}}
# provider side (the expiration occurs): {{provideFlowStepEnd}}. We won't return an error if a time-out occur
# sub-provider #2 side (when the processing ends normally): {{provideFlowStepEnd}}.

Point #5: it's normal to have a 'provideFlowStepEnd' because it's based on the reply returns to the consumer of the main provider. In case of an orchestration, if a timout occurs, a response that is not an error or a fault can be returned.

The expiration does not appear anywhere. And its very difficult to understand point 5 and 6 in temporal point of view.
Christophe DENEUX made changes - Mon, 7 Sep 2015 - 11:51:37 +0200
Description If a service provider is invoked asynchronously (unblocking call), we get following MONIT traces (for a MEP InOut):
# provider side: {{provideFlowStepBegin}},
# sub-provider #1 side (another provider invoked asynchronously): {{provideFlowStepBegin}},
# sub-provider #2 side (another provider invoked asynchronously): {{provideFlowStepBegin}},
# sub-provider #1 side: {{provideFlowStepEnd}}
# provider side (the expiration occurs): {{provideFlowStepEnd}}. We won't return an error if a time-out occur
# sub-provider #2 side (when the processing ends normally): {{provideFlowStepEnd}}.

Point #5: it's normal to have a 'provideFlowStepEnd' because it's based on the reply returns to the consumer of the main provider. In case of an orchestration, if a timout occurs, a response that is not an error or a fault can be returned.

The expiration does not appear anywhere. And its very difficult to understand point 5 and 6 in temporal point of view.
If a service provider is invoked asynchronously (unblocking call), we get following MONIT traces (for a MEP InOut):
# provider side: {{provideFlowStepBegin}},
# sub-provider #1 side (another provider invoked asynchronously): {{provideFlowStepBegin}},
# sub-provider #2 side (another provider invoked asynchronously): {{provideFlowStepBegin}},
# sub-provider #1 side: {{provideFlowStepEnd}}
# provider side (the expiration occurs): {{provideFlowStepEnd}}. We won't return an error if a time-out occurs
# sub-provider #2 side (when the processing ends normally): {{provideFlowStepEnd}}.

Point #5: it's normal to have a 'provideFlowStepEnd' because it's based on the reply returns to the consumer of the main provider. In case of an orchestration, if a timout occurs, a response that is not an error or a fault can be returned.

The expiration does not appear anywhere. And its very difficult to understand point 5 and 6 in temporal point of view.
Christophe DENEUX made changes - Mon, 7 Sep 2015 - 11:51:53 +0200
Description If a service provider is invoked asynchronously (unblocking call), we get following MONIT traces (for a MEP InOut):
# provider side: {{provideFlowStepBegin}},
# sub-provider #1 side (another provider invoked asynchronously): {{provideFlowStepBegin}},
# sub-provider #2 side (another provider invoked asynchronously): {{provideFlowStepBegin}},
# sub-provider #1 side: {{provideFlowStepEnd}}
# provider side (the expiration occurs): {{provideFlowStepEnd}}. We won't return an error if a time-out occurs
# sub-provider #2 side (when the processing ends normally): {{provideFlowStepEnd}}.

Point #5: it's normal to have a 'provideFlowStepEnd' because it's based on the reply returns to the consumer of the main provider. In case of an orchestration, if a timout occurs, a response that is not an error or a fault can be returned.

The expiration does not appear anywhere. And its very difficult to understand point 5 and 6 in temporal point of view.
If a service provider is invoked asynchronously (unblocking call), we get following MONIT traces (for a MEP InOut):
# provider side: {{provideFlowStepBegin}},
# sub-provider #1 side (another provider invoked asynchronously): {{provideFlowStepBegin}},
# sub-provider #2 side (another provider invoked asynchronously): {{provideFlowStepBegin}},
# sub-provider #1 side: {{provideFlowStepEnd}}
# provider side (the expiration occurs): {{provideFlowStepEnd}}. We won't return an error if a time-out occurs
# sub-provider #2 side (when the processing ends normally): {{provideFlowStepEnd}}.


Point #5: it's normal to have a 'provideFlowStepEnd' because it's based on the reply returns to the consumer of the main provider. In case of an orchestration, if a timout occurs, a response that is not an error or a fault can be returned.

The expiration does not appear anywhere. And its very difficult to understand point 5 and 6 in temporal point of view.
Christophe DENEUX made changes - Fri, 11 Sep 2015 - 14:17:50 +0200
Link This issue depends on PETALSDISTRIB-152 [ PETALSDISTRIB-152 ]
Christophe DENEUX made changes - Mon, 5 Oct 2015 - 10:58:42 +0200
Fix Version/s 5.5.1 [ 10599 ]
Fix Version/s 5.5.0 [ 10406 ]
Victor NOËL made changes - Wed, 16 Dec 2015 - 16:27:45 +0100
Fix Version/s 5.6.0 [ 10611 ]
Fix Version/s 5.5.1 [ 10599 ]
Victor NOËL made changes - Wed, 30 Mar 2016 - 13:46:01 +0200
Link This issue depends on PETALSCDK-171 [ PETALSCDK-171 ]
Victor NOËL made changes - Wed, 30 Mar 2016 - 13:46:19 +0200
Status New [ 10000 ] Open [ 10002 ]
Assignee Victor NOËL [ vnoel ]
Victor NOËL made changes - Wed, 30 Mar 2016 - 13:46:22 +0200
Status Open [ 10002 ] In Progress [ 10003 ]
Victor NOËL made changes - Thu, 31 Mar 2016 - 15:23:47 +0200
Link This issue depends on PETALSCDK-171 [ PETALSCDK-171 ]
Victor NOËL made changes - Fri, 1 Apr 2016 - 15:17:13 +0200
Resolution Fixed [ 1 ]
Status In Progress [ 10003 ] Resolved [ 10004 ]

People

Dates

  • Created:
    Mon, 4 Jun 2012 - 17:02:32 +0200
    Updated:
    Fri, 1 Apr 2016 - 15:17:13 +0200
    Resolved:
    Fri, 1 Apr 2016 - 15:17:13 +0200