topic Re: ActivitiOptimisticLockingException on delete from ACT_RU_EXECUTION in Alfresco Archive

ActivitiOptimisticLockingException on delete from ACT_RU_EXECUTION

nutsnbolts — Mon, 11 Aug 2014 11:38:43 GMT

I am using Activiti 5.12 and am encountering an ActivitiOptimisticLockingException on delete from ACT_RU_EXECUTION. The workflow which I created looks like the "Activiti Definition.txt" The receive task is a just sitting there, so that the timer would fire every 1 minute and kick off the service tas

Re: ActivitiOptimisticLockingException on delete from ACT_RU_EXECUTION

jbarrez — Tue, 19 Aug 2014 08:51:17 GMT

How many nodes do you have running an engine on? Are all of those job executors?

The error is happening after executing

2014-08-11 00:08:16,538 [pool-2-thread-9] DEBUG behavior.BpmnActivityBehavior - Leaving activity 'EBSDSServiceTask'

Are there multiple occurences of this step?

Re: ActivitiOptimisticLockingException on delete from ACT_RU_EXECUTION

nutsnbolts — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 06:47:37 GMT

There is 1 single node running an engine with only 1 executor set to true. In my activi.xml I have a timer "EBSDSTimerEvent" that fires off the task "EBSDSServiceTask" on every 59sec of the minute. In most cases "EBSDSServiceTask" completes whatever task it does in less than a minute. However in rare cases it does take maybe 5 minutes to complete, during which time, the service task would have fired multiple times.

In the service task there I have a static variable in there to ensure that only 1 instance of the code is running.

Re: ActivitiOptimisticLockingException on delete from ACT_RU_EXECUTION

jbarrez — Sat, 30 Aug 2014 16:18:31 GMT

Jobs that take 5 minutes to complete will indeed lead to problems. The default wait time for the job executor is 5 minutes. After 5 minutes, it will deem the job as not executed and hanging.

Two solutions: Make the wait time (or the time until it can be unlocked) longer.
Better is to not have jobs that take 5 mins. Keep in mind you are keeping a db transaction open for 5 minutes! This is never a good idea.
Better is to use some queue mechanism that puts the work on a queue and sends it back to the process once its done.