I got a reference to a Job object like this:
Job timer = managementService.createJobQuery().processInstanceId(execution.getParentId()).singleResult();
Could anyone please tell me how can I set the timer due date to an arbitrary
date or time period in Activiti 5.22.0?
I could not find a suitable method in ManagementService or Job class.
Best regards.
For me, I found only one way to do this:
Create a new timer and set config from the old one.
This is a piece example of how I did this, do not forget to fix it, to avoid NPE
TimerEntity oldTimer = (TimerEntity) managementService.createJobQuery()
.processInstanceId("YOUR_PROCESS_INSTANCE_ID")
.timers()
.singleResult();
commandExecutor.execute(new Command<Void>() {
#Override
public Void execute(CommandContext commandContext) {
oldTimer.delete();
TimerEntity newTimer = new TimerEntity();
newTimer.setJobHandlerConfiguration(oldTimer.getJobHandlerConfiguration());
newTimer.setJobHandlerType(oldTimer.getJobHandlerType());
newTimer.setExclusive(oldTimer.isExclusive());
newTimer.setRepeat(oldTimer.getRepeat());
newTimer.setRetries(oldTimer.getRetries());
newTimer.setEndDate(oldTimer.getEndDate());
newTimer.setExecutionId(oldTimer.getExecutionId());
newTimer.setProcessInstanceId(oldTimer.getProcessInstanceId());
newTimer.setProcessDefinitionId(oldTimer.getProcessDefinitionId());
newTimer.setTenantId(oldTimer.getTenantId());
// Sets a new date
newTimer.setDuedate(new Date());
commandContext.getJobEntityManager().schedule(newTimer);
return null;
}
});
Related
When creating a user, entries are required in multiple tables. I am trying to create a transaction that creates a new entry into one table and then pass the new entityid into the parent table and so on. The error I am getting is
The transaction manager has disabled its support for remote/network
transactions. (Exception from HRESULT: 0x8004D024)
I believe this is caused by creating multiple connections within a single TransactionScope, but I am unsure on what the best/most efficient way of doing this is.
[OperationBehavior(TransactionScopeRequired = true)]
public int CreateUser(CreateUserData createData)
{
// Create a new family group and get the ID
var familyGroupId = createData.FamilyGroupId ?? CreateFamilyGroup();
// Create the APUser and get the Id
var apUserId = CreateAPUser(createData.UserId, familyGroupId);
// Create the institution user and get the Id
var institutionUserId = CreateInsUser(apUserId, createData.AlternateId, createData.InstitutionId);
// Create the investigator group user and return the Id
return AddUserToGroup(createData.InvestigatorGroupId, institutionUserId);
}
This is an example of one of the function calls, all the other ones follow the same format
public int CreateFamilyGroup(string familyGroupName)
{
var familyRepo = _FamilyRepo ?? new FamilyGroupRepository();
var familyGroup = new FamilyGroup() {CreationDate = DateTime.Now};
return familyRepo.AddFamilyGroup(familyGroup);
}
And the repository call for this is as follows
public int AddFamilyGroup(FamilyGroup familyGroup)
{
using (var context = new GameDbContext())
{
var newGroup = context.FamilyGroups.Add(familyGroup);
context.SaveChanges();
return newGroup.FamilyGroupId;
}
}
I believe this is caused by creating multiple connections within a single TransactionScope
Yes, that is the problem. It does not really matter how you avoid that as long you avoid it. A common thing to do is to have one connection and one EF context per WCF request. You need to find a way to pass that EF context along.
The method AddFamilyGroup illustrates a common anti-pattern with EF: You are using EF as a CRUD facility. It's supposed to me more like a live object graph connected to the database. The entire WCF request should share the same EF context. If you move in that direction the problem goes away.
I basically have this:
Obj1 Create event:
health_total = 50;
health_current = health_total;
health_text = instance_create(x,y-10,obj_health); // Object to show health of an instance object
health_text.origin = self; // Assign an 'origin' variable so I can access it later?
obj_health Draw event:
show_debug_message(origin.x); // <-- This works just great!
show_debug_message(origin.health_current); // <-- This throws error :(
I assume that the variable might be local but then, how do I make it public? GML is a bit new to me, though, I'm not new to programming. This makes my mind hurt.
Use id, not self:
health_text.origin = id;
Is there a way of registering time when you exit a Unity application (i.e. you press play and stop the app) or perhaps when you exit a standalone build?
Using the following simple line of code, I can write to the console when my start button was pressed, so I wonder if I could do the same when the app is quit, so that the difference would be the length of the session?
Debug.Log("Start Button pressed # " + DateTime.Now);
At the End of Application you can Save your Session Time. And In Start Method you can Load it From PlayerPrefsto use it.
Like This :
void OnApplicationQuit()
{
DateTime time = new DateTime();
time.AddSeconds(Time.realtimeSinceStartup);
PlayerPrefs.SetString("SessionTime",time.ToBinary().ToString());
}
void Start()
{
DateTime time = new DateTime();
string timeString = PlayerPrefs.SetString("SessionTime","");
if(timeString != "")
{
Convert.ToInt64(timeString);
time = DateTime.FromBinary(time);
Debug.Log("Previous Session Time : " + time.ToString());
}
}
You can also achieve this by using System.DateTime.Now and storing it in some variable at start. and getting Session Time at End by subtracting saved time from System.DateTime.Now. I hope its Helpful :)
You can use Time.realtimeSinceStartup to get the number of seconds since the application was start. Furthermore, OnApplicationQuit will be called (on any MonoBehaviour that implements it) when the application is closed. I am not completely sure it works in the editor but I think it would.
void OnApplicationQuit() {
Debug.Log(Time.realtimeSinceStartup);
}
I hope that helps!
We are trying to load and resume workflows which have a delay. I have seen the Microsoft sample of Absolute Delay for this using store.WaitForEvents and LoadRunnableInstance to load the workflow. However here the workflow is already known.
In our case we want to have an event waiting for the store.WaitForEvents after every say 5 seconds to check if there is a runnable instance and if so only load and run that /those particular instances. Is there a way I could know which workflow instance is ready.
We are maintaing the workflow id and the xaml associated to it in our database, so if we could know the workflow instance id we could get the xaml mapped to it, create the workflow and then do a LOadRunnableInstance on it.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Microsoft sample (Absolute Delay)
public void Run(){
wfHostTypeName = XName.Get("Version" + Guid.NewGuid().ToString(),
typeof(WorkflowWithDelay).FullName);
this.instanceStore = SetupSqlpersistenceStore();
this.instanceHandle =
CreateInstanceStoreOwnerHandle(instanceStore, wfHostTypeName);
WorkflowApplication wfApp = CreateWorkflowApp();
wfApp.Run();
while (true)
{
this.waitHandler.WaitOne();
if (completed)
{
break;
}
WaitForRunnableInstance(this.instanceHandle);
wfApp = CreateWorkflowApp();
try
{
wfApp.LoadRunnableInstance();
waitHandler.Reset();
wfApp.Run();
}
catch (InstanceNotReadyException)
{
Console.WriteLine("Handled expected InstanceNotReadyException, retrying...");
}
}
Console.WriteLine("workflow completed.");
}
public void WaitForRunnableInstance(InstanceHandle handle)
{
var events=instanceStore.WaitForEvents(handle, TimeSpan.MaxValue);
bool foundRunnable = false;
foreach (var persistenceEvent in events)
{
if (persistenceEvent.Equals(HasRunnableWorkflowEvent.Value))
{
foundRunnable = true;
break;
}
}
if (!foundRunnable) {
Console.WriteLine("no runnable instance");
}
}
Thanks
Anamika
I had a similar problem with durable delay activities and WorkflowApplicationHost. Ended up creating my own 'Delay' activity that worked essentially the same way as the one out of the box, (takes an arg that describes when to resume the workflow, and then bookmarks itself). Instead of saving delay info in the SqlInstanceStore though, my Delay Activity created a record in a seperate db. (similar to the one you are using to track the Workflow Ids and Xaml). I then wrote a simple service that polled that DB for expired delays and initiated a resume of the necessary workflow.
Oh, and the Delay activity deleted it's record from that DB on bookmark resume.
HTH
I'd suggest having a separate SqlPersistenceStore for each workflow definition you're hosting.
I feel like I must be doing this wrong. I've got a function that is supposed to construct a query based on an API's description of available fields. Here's what I've got:
var query_fields = getQueryFieldsFor(sobject_name);
// Need query fields for the next statement, which actually does the query
public function getQueryFieldsFor(sObject:String):String{
//helper function to get queryfields for given sobject
var queryFields:String = '';
app.connection.describeSObject(sObject,
new mx.rpc.Responder(
function(result:DescribeSObjectResult):void{
var returnFields:String = '';
for ( var field:Field in result.fields ){
if(field.active){
returnFields.concat(field.name+',')
}
}
returnFields.slice(0, returnFields.length-1); //remove last comma
queryFields = returnFields;
}, function(error):void{
Alert.show('error in getQueryFieldsFor function');
})
);
return queryFields;
}
I know this doesn't work, and I think I understand why. However, I keep running into this type of issue and I believe I'm just thinking about it/designing it wrong. So what's a better pattern here? Would really appreciate any insight on this. Many thanks in advance.
It would be better to externalize your functions and execute your next line of code after the fact:
public function getQueryFieldsFor(sObject:String):String
{
var responder:Responder = new Responder( onResult, onFault);
app.connection.describeSObject(sObject, responder);
}
private function onResult(result:DescribeSObjectResult):void
{
var returnFields:String = '';
for ( var field:Field in result.fields ){
if(field.active){
returnFields.concat(field.name+',')
}
}
returnFields.slice(0, returnFields.length-1); //remove last comma
queryFields = returnFields;
}
Your main problem though is not the code, but a lack of thinking asynchronously. You cannot have a function called "getQueryFields" that will return it instantly. What you want to do is think in the request/response way. You're trying to get some data, a request is made to a service, gets the data back, updates a property which is then binded to a view which gets redrawn. This is the proper way to do any webapp.
It might be beneficial for you to also look at application frameworks like RobotLegs and Parsley since it helps you manage these situations. Parsley also has a task library which lets you perform several asynchronous task one after another.