Watson Supply Chain Ideas

Submit new product ideas for Watson Supply Chain solutions. Before you submit, please review existing ideas; if an idea close to yours already exists, it's better to add comments or vote on the existing idea. We will review your ideas and use them to help prioritize our product development. Best of all, the portal will automatically update you when the status of your idea has been changed. Order Management, Store Engagement, Watson Order Optimizer, Inventory Visibility, CPQ and Call Center are now part of Watson Supply Chain

Connect with IBM experts and your peers on the Supply Chain Collaboration Community and the Order Management Interest Group

Submit ideas for other Watson Customer Engagement Products:

Watson Marketing
Watson Campaign Automation
Watson Commerce

Ability to invoke a business processes in a specific queue

In SBI we know that we can assign BPs to a particular queue(s), and that the execution control service can be used in cases where we want to change the priority of a BP during execution, but there doesn't seem to be a way to ensure that an asynchronously invoked BP starts in a specified queue.

  • Avatar32.5fb70cce7410889e661286fd7f1897de Guest
  • Mar 6 2019
  • Uncommitted Candidate
How will this idea be used?

If you execute the attached MAIN BP, you ll see that it invokes 25 children that sleep for 2 minutes in queue 4. It also invokes a PROOF child that is set to queue 4. Its first step is an execution control service to attempt to change it to queue 7. We d like to know if there is a way to invoke the child directly in queue 7, but not have to change its default queue to queue 7.

What is your industry? Healthcare
What is the idea priority? High
DeveloperWorks ID
RTC ID
Link to original RFE
  • Attach files
  • Avatar40.8f183f721a2c86cd98fddbbe6dc46ec9
    Guest commented
    06 Mar 19:04

    attaching the BPs

  • Avatar40.8f183f721a2c86cd98fddbbe6dc46ec9
    Guest commented
    07 Mar 10:35

    I did try and implement a solution with Execution Control Service and in line processes and it is fundamentally flawed. By that I mean the process seems to not want to jeopardise itself. If the queue you are trying to move it to is in a state of backlog then it refuses to switch and continues to process in the starting queue which causes the main “Entry” queue to quickly fall in to backlog which generally causes more problems than you were trying to solve.

    The closest thing to an intelligent solution is to have multiple copies of a stub process with the queue number in the name which calls the “Master” process in-line. This has two drawbacks, one of additional maintenance and complexity but secondly and more importantly loosing onFault ability for some in-line processes further down in the process this is difficult to spot and test for. This also depends on a number of competing factors (like other onFault for example) and requires thought and re-design. It can be done but it’s a really poor work around and horrible to support.

    This functionality is sorely needed for performance solutions.