AW: Reacting Collectively

[Becker Stephan (extern)]

Alon,
 
here another suggestion: in the step after the wait event, put in a =
check
(via attribute or method) to see if the message was already sent. In =
that
case you don't need an additional workflow. The check could be done in =
a
number of ways, one that strings to mind immediately is to set a flag =
in the
workflow container once you send the message, and to check that flag in =
the
other workflows by looking through the containers for the other =
instances of
the workflow. In terms of overhead, it's probably less expensive to =
check a
few thousand db records, than to incur the overhead of a separate =
workflow.
 
Hth,
Stephan
 
-----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Alon Raskin [mailto:araskin at 3i-consulting.com]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. August 2002 13:01
An: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Betreff: Re: Reacting Collectively
 
 
Hi Tomasz,
 
I will try and clarify what I am talking about. This is a hypothetical
example
but I am interested in hearing your thoughts (and anyone else who wants =
to
contribute).
 
1. I have 5000 instances of a Workflow currently running. Each instance =
is
waiting for a file to come into the system via EAI. If the file comes =
in
then
5000 events will be raised (one for each record in the file) and the =
5000
instances will react accordingly.  If the event does not occur after a =
few
days
then I need to send a message to a user letting him/her know.
 
2. The problem is that when the file does not come in after a few days, =
each
workflow would send a message to the user. The users inbox would have =
5000
messages saying that the file did not come in. This is useless and =
annoying
to
the user.
 
The way i understood your suggestion is to have one Master Workflow =
that
monitors whether the file came in and notify the users. My problem with =
that
approach is as follows:
 
1. What kicks off the Master Workflow? It cant be the Instance Workflow =
as
they
would end up kicking off 5000 instances of the Master Workflow which =
defeats
the purpose.
 
I look forward to your reply.
 
Regards,
 
Alon Raskin
3i Consulting Group
http://www.3i-consulting.com
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Quoting "Zmudzin,Tomasz,VEVEY,GL-DS/DM" <Tomasz.Zmudzin at nestle.com>:
 
> Alon,
>
> I think I still don't understand the problem. If you refer to the
> additional
> scenario that sends notification as "master" workflow, you wouldn't =
have
> to
> restart it in case of system crash -- it would simply still be =
listening
> to
> the events. And if  the event that you refer to is the system crash =
--
> well,
> there's not much you can handle in this case.
>
> I'm sorry to be so investigative -- actually I'm quite interested in
> the
> problem as this type of control-related requirements I find
> particularly
> playful. Knowing from the previous posts that you know the subject in
> depth
> -- and still asking for other options -- actually makes me even more
> interested...
>
> Kind regards,
> Tomasz
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Alon Raskin [mailto:araskin at 3i-consulting.com]
> Sent: Thursday,29. August 2002 09:01
> To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Re: Reacting Collectively
>
>
> I thought about that but then I would need to have this 'master'
> workflow
> that sat around and listened. If we ever have a system crash it would
> need
> to be manually restarted as nothing actually kicks it off. Its not
> really a
> 'Workflow' as such but rather just a little monitor.
>
> Don't get me wrong Tomasz, that approach will work its just that I
> wanted to
> see if anyone else had any other ideas.
>
> Regards,
>
> Alon Raskin
> 3i Consulting Group
> e: araskin at 3i-consulting.com
> w: http://www.3i-consulting.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: SAP Workflow [mailto:Owner-SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU]On Behalf Of
> Zmudzin,Tomasz,VEVEY,GL-DS/DM
> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 7:55 AM
> To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Re: Reacting Collectively
>
> And if you defined another workflow process that would subscribe to
> that
> event and send the notification?
>
> Tomasz
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Alon Raskin [mailto:araskin at 3i-consulting.com]
> Sent: Thursday,29. August 2002 08:47
> To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Reacting Collectively
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> I just wanted your thoughts and experiences on the following.
>
> Say I have 5000 instances of a Workflow running in my system. When a
> particular event occurs (which all the Workflow instances are =
listening
> for)
> I want a mail sent to the User. The hard part is that I want only one
> mail
> sent and not 5000 as I do not want to flood the users inbox with 5000
> similar messages.
>
> I am sure that others have come across a similar scenario and I hope =
to
> hear
> your ideas.
>
> Regards,
>
> Alon Raskin
> 3i Consulting Group
> e: araskin at 3i-consulting.com
> w: http://www.3i-consulting.com
>